eurometaux product environmental footprint category rules...

Revision 0.9a 17/06/2016

thinkstep AG

EUROMETAUX

Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) for “Metal Sheets for various applications”

Authors Company name

Jan Bollen Arcelor Mittal

Annick Carpentier Eurometaux

Johannes Drielsma Euromines

Mirona Coropciuc Euromines

Dr. Alistair Davidson ELSIA

Staf Laget Eurometaux

Christian Leroy European Aluminium

Djibril René European Aluminium

Laia Perez Simbor ECI

Ladji Tikana DKI/ECI

Rob Versfeld Tata Steel Europe

Iain Miller Tata Steel Europe

Nick Avery Tata Steel Europe

Daniela Cholakova Aurubis

Karin Hinrichs-Petersen Aurubis

Jörn Mühlenfeld Aurubis

Emiliano Micalizio KME

Thomas Prayer Hydro

Dr. Johannes Gediga thinkstep AG

Stefan Horlacher thinkstep AG

Dr. Constantin Herrmann thinkstep AG

Andreas Busa thinkstep AG

Contact:

Annick Carpentier,

Eurometaux

Address Line 1

Address Line 2

Address Line 3

Phone +3227766314

Fax Fax Number

E-mail [email protected]

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................... III

GLOSSARY AND TERMINOLOGY .......................................................................................................... IV

1 GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PEFCR .................................................................. 10

1.1 Technical Secretariat ......................................................................................................... 10

1.2 Consultation and stakeholders .......................................................................................... 11

1.3 Date of publication and expiration .................................................................................... 11

1.4 Geographic region ............................................................................................................. 11

1.5 Language of PEFCR ............................................................................................................ 11

2 METHODOLOGICAL INPUTS AND COMPLIANCE ............................................................. 12

2.1 Normative references ........................................................................................................ 12

2.2 PCR references................................................................................................................... 12

3 PEFCR REVIEW AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION ....................................................... 14

3.1 PEFCR review panel ........................................................................................................... 14

3.2 Review requirements for the PEFCR document ................................................................. 14

3.3 Reasoning for development of PEFCR................................................................................ 14

3.4 Conformance with the PEFCR Guidance ............................................................................ 14

4 PEFCR SCOPE ..................................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Unit of analysis .................................................................................................................. 15

4.2 Representative product(s) ................................................................................................. 16

4.3 Product classification (NACE/CPA) ..................................................................................... 16

4.4 System boundaries – life-cycle stages and processes ........................................................ 17

4.5 Selection of the EF impact categories indicators ............................................................... 18

4.6 Additional environmental information .............................................................................. 19

4.7 Assumptions/limitations .................................................................................................... 20

5 RESOURCE USE AND EMISSION PROFILE ......................................................................... 22

5.1 Screening step ................................................................................................................... 22

5.2 Data quality requirements ................................................................................................. 29

5.3 Requirements regarding foreground specific data collection ............................................ 29

5.4 Requirements regarding background generic data and data gaps .................................... 30

5.5 Data gaps ........................................................................................................................... 33

5.6 Use stage ........................................................................................................................... 33

5.7 Logistics ............................................................................................................................. 33

5.8 End-of-life stage and related PEF equation ....................................................................... 34

ii

5.9 Requirements for multifunctional products and multiproducts ........................................ 34

5.10 Guidance for determining equation parameters ............................................................... 39

6 BENCHMARK AND CLASSES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE ................................ 40

7 INTERPRETATION ............................................................................................................ 41

8 REPORTING, DISCLOSURE AND COMMUNICATION ........................................................ 43

8.1 PEF external communication report .................................................................................. 43

8.2 PEF performance tracking report....................................................................................... 47

8.3 PEF Declaration .................................................................................................................. 47

8.4 PEF label ............................................................................................................................ 50

9 VERIFICATION .................................................................................................................. 51

10 REFERENCE LITERATURE ................................................................................................. 52

11 SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR THE PEFCR ................................................................. 54

12 LIST OF ANNEXES ................................................................................................................. 55

12.1 ANNEX I – Representative Product and Existing Product standards .................................. 56

12.2 ANNEX II – Bill Of Materials (BOM) .................................................................................... 67

12.3 ANNEX III – Supporting Studies .......................................................................................... 70

12.4 ANNEX IV – Metal production ............................................................................................ 85

12.5 ANNEX V – Benchmark and classes of environmental performance.................................. 88

12.6 ANNEX VI – Co-products in Metal production ................................................................... 89

12.7 ANNEX VII – Upstream scenarios (optional) ...................................................................... 92

12.8 ANNEX VIII – Downstream Scenarios (optional) ................................................................ 93

12.9 ANNEX IX – Normalisation factors ..................................................................................... 94

12.10 ANNEX X – Weighting factors ........................................................................................ 95

12.11 ANNEX XI – Foreground data ......................................................................................... 96

12.12 ANNEX XII – Background data ..................................................................................... 140

12.13 ANNEX XIII – EOL forumlas .......................................................................................... 158

12.14 ANNEX XIV – Background information on methodological choices taken during the development of the PEFCR ....................................................................................................... 159

12.15 ANNEX XV – PCR References ....................................................................................... 174

12.16 ANNEX XVI – Hot-Spots ............................................................................................... 176

12.17 ANNEX XVII – Data quality Requirements .................................................................... 194

12.18 ANNEX XVIII – Screening Study .................................................................................... 199

iii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ADP Abiotic Depletion Potential

AP Acidification Potential

CML Centre of Environmental Science at Leiden

CPA Classification of Products by Activity

EC European Commission

ELCD European Life Cycle Database

EoL End-of-Life

EP Eutrophication Potential

FDES Fiches de Déclaration Environnementales et Sanitaires

GaBi Ganzheitliche Bilanzierung (German for holistic balancing)

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GWP Global Warming Potential

IBU Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. http://construction-environment.com

ILCD International Cycle Data System

ISO International Organization for Standardization

LCA Life Cycle Assessment

LCI Life Cycle Inventory

LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment

NACE Nomenclature statistique des activités économiques dans la Communauté Européenne (French for nomenclature of economic activities in the European Union)

ODP Ozone Depletion Potential

PCR Product Category Rules

PEF Product Environmental Footprint

POCP Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential

PSR Product Specific Rules

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

TS Technical Secretariat

http://construction-environment.com/

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Glossary:European_Union_%28EU%29

iv

GLOSSARY AND TERMINOLOGY

The following terms and definitions apply for this document.

Additional Environmental Information – Environmental footprint impact categories and other environmental indicators that are calculated and communicated alongside PEF results. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Allocation – An approach to solving multi-functionality problems. It refers to partitioning the input or output flows of a process, a product system or a facility between the system under study and one or more other systems” (based on ISO 14040:2006).

Average Data – Refers to a production-weighted average of specific data. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Background Process – Refers to those processes of the product supply chain for which no direct access to information is possible. For example, most of the upstream supply-chain processes and generally all processes further downstream will be considered to be background processes. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Billet – A cast refinery shape of circular cross-section, used for the production of tube, rod, bar, profiles or forgings [MURRAY, S., 1978].

Business-to-Business (B2B) – Describes transactions between businesses, such as between a manufacturer and a wholesaler, or between a wholesaler and a retailer. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Business-to-Consumers (B2C) – Describes transactions between businesses and consumers, such as between retailers and consumers. According to ISO 14025:2006, a consumer is defined as “an individual member of the general public purchasing or using goods, property or services for private purposes”. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Cathode – A rough flat refinery shape made by electrolytic deposition and normally used for remelting [MURRAY, S., 1978].

Characterisation – Calculation of the magnitude of the contribution of each classified input/output to their respective EF impact categories, and aggregation of contributions within each category. This requires a linear multiplication of the inventory data with characterisation factors for each substance and EF impact category of concern. For example, with respect to the EF impact category “climate change”, CO2 is chosen as the reference substance and tonne CO2 -equivalents as the reference unit. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Characterisation factor – Factor derived from a characterisation model which is applied to convert an assigned Resource Use and Emissions Profile result to the common unit of the EF category indicator (based on ISO 14040:2006)

Classification – Assigning the material/energy inputs and outputs inventoried in the Resource and Emissions Profile to EF impact categories according to each substance’s potential to contribute to each of the EF impact categories considered. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Close loop & open loop – A closed-loop allocation procedure applies to closed-loop product systems. It also applies to open-loop product systems where no changes occur in the inherent properties of the recycled material. In such cases, the need for allocation is avoided since the use of secondary material displaces the use of virgin (primary) materials. An open-loop allocation procedure applies to open-

v

loop product systems where the material is recycled into other product systems and the material undergoes a change to its inherent properties. [based on ISO 14044:2006]

Cradle to grave – Addresses the environmental aspects and potential environmental impacts (e.g. use of resources and environmental consequences of releases) throughout a product's life cycle from raw material acquisition until the end of life.

Cradle to gate – Addresses the environmental aspects and potential environmental impacts (e.g. use of resources and environmental consequences of releases) throughout a product's life cycle from raw material acquisition until the end of the production process (“gate of the factory”). It may also include transportation until use phase.

Critical review –Process intended to ensure consistency between a PEF study and the principles and requirements of this PEF Guide and PEFCRs (if available) (based on ISO 14040:2006).

Data Quality – Characteristics of data that relate to their ability to satisfy stated requirements (ISO 14040:2006). Data quality covers various aspects, such as technological, geographical and time-related representativeness, as well as completeness and precision of the inventory data.

Environmental Footprint (EF) impact assessment – Phase of the EF analysis aimed at understanding and evaluating the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impacts for a system throughout the life cycle (ISO 14044:2006). The EF impact assessment methods provide impact characterisation factors for elementary flows in order to aggregate the impact to obtain a limited number of midpoint and/or damage indicators. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Environmental Footprint (EF) Impact Assessment Method – Protocol for quantitative translation of Resource Use and Emissions Profile data into contributions to an environmental impact of concern. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Environmental Footprint (EF) Impact Category – Class of resource use or environmental impact to which the Resource Use and Emissions Profile data are related. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Environmental Footprint (EF) Impact Category Indicator – Quantifiable representation of an EF impact category [based on ISO 14044:2006]

Environmental impact – Any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, that wholly or partially result from an Organisation’s activities or products (EMAS regulation).

E V -specific emissions and resources consumed (per unit of analysis) arising from virgin material (i.e. virgin material acquisition and pre-processing).

𝑬𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒚𝒄𝒍𝒆𝒅 =∑𝑅1,𝑖 × 𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑑,𝑖

𝑛

𝑖=1

Erecycled: specific emissions and resources consumed (per unit of analysis) arising from the recycling processes of the secondary material (or reused) material, including collection, sorting, transportation and melting processes. Depending on the type and origin of the secondary material, additional processes may be included. Therefore Erecycled may be made up of a combination of different levels of processing.

vi

𝑅1,𝑖: 𝑅1 =∑𝑅1,𝑖

𝑛

𝑖=1

; 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑅1 𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑤

R1,i is the individual recycling content that the respective technology i contributes to the total recycled content.

i: Recycling technology number i

n: the number of all existing and/or considered recycling technologies

𝑬𝒓𝒆𝒄𝒚𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈𝑬𝒐𝑳 =∑𝑅2,𝑖 × 𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔𝐸𝑜𝐿,𝑖

𝑛

𝑖=1

ErecyclingEoL: specific emissions and resources consumed (per unit of analysis) arising from the recycling processes at the end-of-life stage, including collection, sorting, transportation and melting processes. Depending on the type and origin of the secondary material, additional processes may be included. Therefore ErecyclingEoL may be made up of a combination of different levels of processing.

𝑅2,𝑖: 𝑅2 =∑𝑅2,𝑖

𝑛

𝑖=1

; 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑅2 𝑠𝑒𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑤

R2,i is the individual recycling share at EoL that the respective technology i contributes to the total end of life recycling rate.

i: Recycling technology at EoL number i

n: the number of all existing and/or considered recycling technologies at EoL

Flow diagram – Schematic representation of the modelled system (foreground systems and links to background system), and all major inputs and outputs. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Foreground Process – Refers to those processes of the product life cycle for which direct access to information is available. For example, the producer’s site and other processes operated by the producer or contractors (e.g. goods transport, head-office services, etc.) belong to the foreground system. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Functional Unit – quantified performance of a product system for use as a reference unit. [based on ISO 14044:2006]

Gate to Gate – a partial product supply chain that includes only the processes within a specific manufacturer or site. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Gate to Grave – a partial product supply chain that includes only the processes within a specific manufacturer or site and the processes occurring along the supply chain such as distribution, storage, use, and disposal or recycling stages. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Generic Data – Refers to data that are not directly collected, measured, or estimated, but rather sourced from a third-party life cycle inventory database or other source that complies with the data quality requirements of the PEF Guide [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]; Note: synonymous with “secondary data”.

vii

Ingot – A cast refinery shape in a form suitable only for remelting. Note – “ingots” are sometimes called “ingot bars” [MURRAY, S., 1978].

Intermediate product – Output form a unit process that is input to other unit processes that require further transformation within the system (ISO 14040:2006).

Life cycle – Consecutive and interlinked stages of a product system, from raw material acquisition or generation from natural resources to final disposal (based on ISO 14040:2006).

Life Cycle Approach – Takes into consideration the spectrum of resource flows and environmental interventions associated with a product or organisation from a supply chain perspective, including all stages from raw material acquisition through processing, distribution, use, and end-of-life processes, and all relevant related environmental impacts (instead of focusing on a single issue). [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Life cycle assessment (LCA) – Compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle (based on ISO 14040:2006). [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Life-Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) – Phase of life cycle assessment that aims at understanding and evaluating the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impacts for a system throughout the life cycle (based on ISO 14040:2006). The LCIA methods used provide impact characterisation factors for elementary flows in order to aggregate the impact to obtain a limited number of midpoint and/or damage indicators. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Multi-functionality – If a process or facility provides more than one function, i.e. it delivers several goods and/or services ("co-products"), it is “multi-functional”. In these situations, all inputs and emissions linked to the process must be partitioned between the product of interest and the other co-products in a principled manner. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Non-elementary (or complex) flows – Remaining inputs and outputs which are not elementary flows and need further modelling efforts to be transformed into elementary flows. Examples of non-elementary inputs are electricity, materials, transport processes and examples of non-elementary outputs are waste and by-products. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Output – Product, material or energy flow that leaves a unit process. Products and materials include raw materials, intermediate products, co-products and releases [based on ISO 14040:2006].

Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCRs) – Are product-type-specific, life-cycle-based rules that complement general methodological guidance for PEF studies by providing further specification at the level of a specific product category. PEFCRs can help to shift the focus of the PEF study towards those aspects and parameters that matter the most, and hence contribute to increased relevance, reproducibility and consistency. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Product Category Rules (PCR) – Set of specific rules, requirements and guidelines for developing Type III environmental declarations for one or more product categories (based on ISO 14025).

PEF Profile – The quantified results of a PEF study. It includes the quantification of the impacts for the most relevant impact categories and the additional environmental information considered necessary to be reported. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

viii

Primary Raw-Materials – Primary Raw-Materials are the basic (naturally occurring) materials from which a product is made. In LC terms it means those basic (naturally occurring) materials that are introduced into the boundaries of the studied system.

Reserve Base (CML, 2002) – Total of the deposits which meet certain minimal chemical and physical requirements to potentially become economically exploitable within planning horizons, but which includes speculative estimates of undiscovered resources that may or may not be economic within those planning horizons.

Reserve Base (USGS, 2015) - That part of an identified resource that meets specified minimum physical and chemical criteria related to current mining and production practices, including those for grade, quality, thickness, and depth. The reserve base is the in-place demonstrated (measured plus indicated) resource from which reserves are estimated.

Resource (USGS, 2015) - A concentration of naturally occurring solid, liquid, or gaseous material in or on the Earth’s crust in such form and amount that economic extraction of a commodity from the concentration is currently or potentially feasible.

Resource Use and Emissions Profile results – Outcome of a Resource Use and Emissions Profile that catalogues the flows crossing the PEF boundary and provides the starting point for the EF impact assessment. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

R1 - [dimensionless] = “recycled (or reused) content of material”, is the proportion of material entering the product that has originated from secondary material coming from outside the product system boundary. Scrap generated from within the production system under study shall be excluded from R1 (0=<R1 <=1). Any yield loss from melting secondary material inputs shall be already accounted for. If this information is not directly available, the choice of any proxy shall be clearly stated, explained and justified.

R2 - [dimensionless] = “recycling (or reuse) fraction of material”, is the share of the material in the product that is recycled (or reused) at end of life (0=<R2=<1). R2, usually called the “end of life recycling rate”, shall consider all the material losses in the collection and recycling (or reuse) processes up to the point of substitution (e.g. the slab). If this information is not directly available, the choice of any proxy shall be clearly stated, explained and justified.

Reference flow - Measure of the outputs from processes in a given product system required to fulfil the function expressed by the unit of analysis (based on ISO 14040:2006). The reference flow is the amount of product needed in order to provide the defined function. All other input and output flows in the analysis quantitatively relate to it. The reference flow can be expressed in direct relation to the unit of analysis or in a more product-oriented way (PEF pilot Guidance V5.2). [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Scrap – Metal fragments, materials or components containing metal that can be used as starting material for metal recycling. In the metal industry, metallic scrap is is recycled to produce secondary metal. Any scrap produced along the fabrication chain is called pre-consumer scrap while metallic scrap collected at the end of life stage is classified as post-consumer scrap.

Scrap pool – The scrap pool is a concept that represents the metallic scrap that is available for recycling into secondary metal. It can also be considered as a sink/receptor for metal scrap generated at end of life stage or during fabrication stages. This pool can be composed of different types of scrap which can be classified under various categories.

ix

Secondary Raw-Material – Secondary Raw-Materials are the basic materials (recovered from previous use or waste) from which a product is made. In LC terms it means those basic materials (recovered from previous use or waste) that are introduced into the boundaries of the studied system.

Sensitivity analysis – Systematic procedures for estimating the effects of the choices made regarding methods and data on the outcome of PEF study (based on ISO 14040: 2006).

Slab – A cast refinery shape of rectangular cross-section, generally used for rolling into plate, sheet, strip or profiles [MURRAY, S., 1978]

Soil Organic Matter (SOM) – Is the measure of the content of organic material in soil. This derives from plants and animals and comprises all of the organic matter in the soil exclusive of the matter that has not decayed. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Specific Data – Refers to directly measured or collected data representative of activities at a specific facility or set of facilities; synonymous with “primary data”. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

System Boundary – Definition of aspects included or excluded from the study. For example, for a “cradle-to-grave” EF analysis, the system boundary should include all activities from the extraction of raw materials through the processing, distribution, storage, use, and disposal or recycling stages. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

System Boundary diagram – Graphic representation of the system boundary defined for the PEF study. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Temporary carbon storage happens when a product “reduces the GHGs in the atmosphere” or creates “negative emissions”, by removing and storing carbon for a limited amount of time.

Uncertainty analysis – Procedure to assess the uncertainty introduced into the results of a PEF study due to data variability and choice-related uncertainty. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Unit of analysis – The unit of analysis defines the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the function(s) and/or service(s) provided by the Organisation being evaluated; the unit of analysis definition answers the questions “what?”, “how much?”, “how well?”, and “for how long?”. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Unit process – Smallest element considered in the Resource Use and Emissions Profile for which input and output data are quantified. (based on ISO 14040:2006).

Upstream – Occurring along the supply chain of purchased goods/services prior to entering the manufacturing site for the product. [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]

Waste – Substances or objects which the holder intends or is required to dispose (based on ISO 14025).

shall, should and may – The term “shall” is used to indicate a requirement. The term “should” is used to indicate a recommendation rather than a requirement. The term “may” is used to indicate an option that is permissible. [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2]

10

1 GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PEFCR 1

This PEFCR provides Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) for developing Product 2 Environmental Footprints for metal sheets. 3

It provides a structure to ensure that all Product Environmental Footprints (PEF) for metal sheets are 4 derived, verified and presented in a harmonised way. 5

Metal sheets are products which may require further transformation for their final application. This 6 PEFCR becomes a “module” to be used for the development of a PEF for products further down the 7 supply chain /PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/. The PEFCR of the metal sheet for various applications will 8 provide the necessary guidance for the PEF studies being undertaken for the final applications to help 9 guarantee that the consistent information is used as input into the PEF study of the final application. 10

Note: The structure of this document follows the “Template for Product Environmental Footprint 11 Category Rules”/PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/. 12

This version of the document is a draft PEFCR resulting from intensive discussion about the application 13 and solid interpretation of the PEF methodological guidance and rules. That includes analytical, 14 structural and methodological adaptation and application. 15

Upon request by the DG Environment all methodological choices taken during the development of this 16 PEFCR, which were dispersed throughout the document at respective points of application, were 17 moved to the corresponding ANNEX XIV. This was applied after closure of the stakeholder consultation 18 period, while the content as such did not change and before submission of this draft to the Steering 19 Committee. Only information related to rules remains in the core text. 20

1.1 TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT 21

The members of the technical secretariat (TS) are listed in the following table. 22

Table 1-1: Members of the Technical Secretariat 23

Organisation name Sector Website

Eurometaux

(Coordinator)

Non-ferrous metals association www.eurometaux.org

thinkstep AG Sustainability consulting www.thinkstep.com

ArcelorMittal Steel & Mining company www.arcelormittal.com

Aurubis Group Manufacturing and processing of copper and other non-ferrous metals (company)

www.aurubis.com

EAA (European Aluminium Association) Aluminium – metal sector association www.alueurope.eu

ECI (European Copper institute) Metal association www.eurocopper.org

ELSIA (European Lead Sheet Industry Association)

Lead Sheet in Construction Sector association

http://elsia.org.uk

Euromines (European Association of Mining Industries, Metal Ores &

Industrial Minerals)

Mining association www.euromines.org

KME Copper products company http://www.kme.com/en

TataSteel Steel company www.tatasteel.com

http://www.aurubis.com/

http://www.alueurope.eu/

http://elsia.org.uk/

http://www.kme.com/en

http://www.tatasteel.com/

11

1.2 CONSULTATION AND STAKEHOLDERS 24

This PEFCR was prepared by: members of the technical secretariat (Table 1-1)

Consultation period: 29. April 2015 – 2.June 2015

Consultation meetings: to be completed after consultation

Cumulative description of participants and statistical figures to each consultation 25

1.3 DATE OF PUBLICATION AND EXPIRATION 26

Version number: Rev. 0.9a

Date of publication: 06/2016

Date of expiration: to be completed after consultation

1.4 GEOGRAPHIC REGION 27

The PEFCR document is valid within the following geographical representativeness: All products 28 produced in Europe. 29

1.5 LANGUAGE OF PEFCR 30

The PEFCR document is developed in English. 31

12

2 METHODOLOGICAL INPUTS AND COMPLIANCE 32

2.1 NORMATIVE REFERENCES 33

The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated 34 references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced 35 document (including any amendments) applies. 36

ISO 14040 37

Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and framework 38

ISO 14044 39

Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines 40

2.2 PCR REFERENCES 41

The following PCR documents were referenced while creating the PEFCR document 42

2.2.1 Building metals 43

PCR Ident. PCR name Program operator Additional information

NPCR013rev1 Steel as construction material

The Norwegian EPD foundation

Functional unit: kg

Basic Metals Environdec Functional unit: not specified

V1.5 Structural Steel Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V.

Functional unit: t

(Other declared units are allowed if the conversion to

t is shown transparently.)

V1.5 Building metals Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V.

Functional unit: kg

Other declared units are allowed if the conversion to kg is shown transparently.)

V1.5 Products of aluminium and aluminium alloys

Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V.

Functional unit: kg


44

13

2.2.2 Other applications 45


PCR 2002:01 Fabricated steel products, except construction

products and equipment

Environdec Functional unit: t

PN514 issue 0.0 Product Category Rules for Type III environmental product declaration of

construction products to EN15804:2012

BRE Group Functional unit: Mass (1t) / Area (m²) / Length (m) /

Volume (m³) / Item (piece)

(conversion factors shall be specified to calculate between the functional

unit an the declared unit)

V1.5 Thin walled profiles and profiled panels of metal


Functional unit: m²

(If more suitable for the application of profiles the

declared unit meter of profile may be used. The mass reference must be

specified.)

PCR – 30/01/2013 Product Category Rules (PCR) for Aluminium

Building Products

European Aluminium Association

(www.alueurope.eu/updated-epd-programme-2/)

Depending on the product type: m2 for sheet

products

2.2.3 Others 46

European Copper Institute (ECI), Copper Alliance: The environmental profile of copper products, 2012 47

European Aluminium Association (EAA): Environmental profile Report for the Aluminium industry, 48 April 2013 49

European Lead Sheet Industry Association (ELSIA): Life Cycle Assessment Report of Lead Sheet, May 50 2014 51

World Steel Association (worldsteel): Life Cycle Inventory for steel products Methodology Report, 52 March 2011 53

International Lead Organisation (ILO): Life Cycle Inventory – LCI of Primary and Secondary Lead 54 production, February 2011 55

Recommendation 2013/179/EU on The use of common methods to measure and communicate the 56 life cycle environmental performance of products and organizations 57

Product Environmental Footprint Pilot Guidance, Guidance for the implementation of the EU Product 58 Environmental Footprint (PEF) during the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase, version 5.1 59

14

3 PEFCR REVIEW AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION 60

3.1 PEFCR REVIEW PANEL 61

3.2 REVIEW REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PEFCR DOCUMENT 62

3.3 REASONING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF PEFCR 63

This PEFCR is developed under the context of a PEF pilot project for further testing purposes through 64 supporting studies. The intention is that this PEFCR will inform downstream users of metal sheets, 65 including other pilots, on how to treat metals in their emissions profiles. 66

3.4 CONFORMANCE WITH THE PEFCR GUIDANCE 67

This PEFCR has been developed in conformance with the PEF Guide and the Guidance Products v5.2. 68

15

4 PEFCR SCOPE 69

4.1 UNIT OF ANALYSIS 70

This document provides Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) for product 71 environmental footprints (PEF) for metal sheets as intermediate products. 72

A metal sheet is a product manufactured at an industrial site with specific properties (e.g. mechanical 73 properties, surface properties, conductivity etc.). It is typically an intermediate product that requires 74 further transformation to an end-use product within the following application sectors (non-exhaustive 75 list): 76

- building and construction applications 77

- transport 78

- appliances 79

- packaging 80

- engineering 81

Any surface treatment or finishing of the intermediate product is included in the scope and depends 82 on the individual specification of the product as it will be sold on the market. 83

The function of a metal sheet within an end-use product is usually multiple. Examples of these 84 functions are: structural integrity, weather protection, physical separation, shaping, sealing and 85 aesthetics (non-exhaustive list). 86

This PEFCR is developed in the context of a PEF pilot project covering aluminium, steel, copper and 87 lead sheets for building or appliance applications. For other metal sheets, any new PEF study will first 88 require a screening of the existing PEFCR for metal sheets and an assessment of the applicability of 89 the PEFCR to the other metal will have to be made. 90

Depending on the application, the metal sheet may be composed of almost 100% pure metal (e.g. 91 copper or lead) or an alloy ‘(e.g. steel or aluminium). For some specific applications, the metal sheet 92 may also be coated with a metallic or a non-metallic coating. Since metal sheets are usually composed 93 of low-alloyed metals or coated with a thin layer, the modelling trough a “pure metal” sheet model 94 appears in most cases a reasonable proxy. This PEFCR is applicable for pure metal sheets (in the case 95 of copper and lead) and sheets that include low level of alloying elements and /or coatings (in the case 96 of aluminium and steel.). The composition of the low alloyed sheets depends on the application and 97 it is defined in Annex II. 98

For a metal sheet made of an alloy which is not listed in Annex II, a sensitivity analysis should be 99 performed to assess the relevance of the other elements composing the alloy and/or the coating. If 100 the sensitivity analysis does not change the profile of the hot spot analysis, this PEFCR may be applied. 101 The contribution of these other elements to the hot spot analysis shall be documented and provided 102 to the verifier. 103

The unit of analysis and reference flow in this PEFCR is defined as follows: 104

4.1.1 Function (“What”) 105

The function includes a non-exhaustive list e.g. structural integrity, weather protection, physical 106 separation, shaping, sealing, aesthetics etc. 107

16

4.1.2 The extent of the function or service (“how much”) 108

The extent of the function expressed in the reference flow is defined as 1 m² of metal sheet. 109

Note: This reference flow was selected because it adequately quantifies the most relevant applications 110 of the metal sheet. However, 1 kg may also be used as an alternative reference flow, as in the case of 111 some existing PCRs -where it can be relevant for specific applications of the metal sheet e.g. in the 112 case of cold formed sections. 113

4.1.3 The expected level of quality (“how well”) 114

Metal sheets can be used in a very wide variety of applications. For metal sheets as intermediate 115 product to be used in final applications, the “how well” strongly depends on the downstream 116 application and its specific requirements and cannot be generalized. The “how well” is specified by 117 the product standard. A non-exhaustive list of applicable product standards for metal sheets is 118 provided in ANNEX I. 119

Specific product standards and technical properties of a specific metal sheet PEF shall be declared in 120 the PEF documentation. 121

4.1.4 The duration/life time of the product (“how long”) 122

The life-time of the metal sheet (“how long”?) is determined by its specific application. The use phase 123 and the related life time are not relevant for the PEFCR for the intermediate state of the metal sheets, 124 but will be required for all final products PEFs. Therefore, a typical use phase scenario shall be defined 125 for the various applications in a final product application. 126

4.2 REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCT(S) 127

An "intermediate" metal sheet is typically subject to additional manufacturing steps in order to be 128 transformed into the final product (e.g. metal sheet undergo machine or manual working operations 129 such as forming, bending, seaming , joining, welding to make a building‘s roof covering or facade). 130 Further explanation regarding the manufacturing steps see chapter 4.4 and the corresponding flow 131 sheet. A corresponding bill of materials is listed in ANNEX II. 132

A metal sheet is an intermediate product that can be used in many different end applications. The 133 grade of metal, thickness of the sheet and the surface finish will be dependent on the specific end use. 134 Examples are given in this PEFCR of “representative products”, but it should be stressed that these 135 examples do not specify exact technical parameters, and these examples should not be used as criteria 136 for benchmarking. These representative examples for end applications can be found in ANNEX I. 137

4.3 PRODUCT CLASSIFICATION (NACE/CPA) 138

The PEFCR cover metal sheets with the following statistical classification codes /CPA/: 139

Table 4-1: Product classification according to CPA 140

Material CPA

Steel C24.1

Lead C24.4.3

Copper C24.4.4

Aluminium C24.4.2

17

4.4 SYSTEM BOUNDARIES – LIFE-CYCLE STAGES AND PROCESSES 141

The system boundary for a PEF of metal sheets includes the life cycle stages as shown in the following 142 Figure 4-1 and Table 4.2. 143

For the hot-spot analysis, at least the breakdown according to the group of process steps framed with 144 the thick border in Table 4-2 shall be used. Processes with an asterisk (*) can be fed by virgin sources 145 or recycling sources, i.e. with metal scrap. Figure 11 in ANNEX XIV provides a more detailed flow 146 diagram. 147

The declaration of the EoL stage is part of the mandatory additional environmental information and 148 details are given in chapter 4.6. 149

Any surface treatment or finishing of the intermediate product is included in the scope and depends 150 on the individual specification of the product as it will be sold on the market. 151

Figure 4-1 depicts an overview of the lifecycle of a typical metallic sheet. The dotted lines indicate 152 which processes and life cycle stages are included and which are excluded from this PEFCR. 153 Exploration, Fabrication and use are out of scope. 154

155

Figure 4-1: Product flow sheet and system boundaries 156

Table 4-2 provides details about the various processes to be considered per type of metal. 157

18

Table 4-2: Life-cycle stages and corresponding processes for the four metal sheets. 158

Life Cycle Stages

Generic process Steps (as in Fig. 1)

Specific Process Steps

Aluminium Copper Steel Lead

Raw Material

Acquisition (incl. Metal Production)

Exploration Not covered Not covered Not covered Not covered

Mining (incl. downstream

transport) Mining Mining Mining Mining

Beneficiation (incl.

downstream transport)

Alumina Refining Beneficiation/

Flotation Beneficiation

Beneficiation /Flotation

Hydro- or Pyro-metallurgy (incl.

downstream transport)*

Smelting* Solvent Extract. /

Smelting* / Refining*

BOF / EAF*

Smelting* / Refining *

Metal Sheet Production

Melting & Casting*

Casting* Melting & Casting*

Casting* Melting & Casting*

Rolling Hot and cold

rolling Rolling Rolling Rolling

Finishing, incl. Surface Treat.

Finishing Finishing Finishing Finishing

Fabrication Not covered Not covered Not covered Not covered

Use Use Not covered Not covered Not covered Not covered

End of Life recycling

Collection, transport &

scrap preparation

Collection, transport,

Shredding & Sorting


Shredding & Sorting


Shredding & Sorting


Shredding & Sorting

159

A more detailed explanation of the Production and EoL stage can be found in ANNEX XIV. 160

4.5 SELECTION OF THE EF IMPACT CATEGORIES INDICATORS 161

Once the Resource Use and Emissions Profile has been compiled, the EF impact assessment shall be 162 undertaken to calculate the environmental performance of the product, using the selected EF impact 163 categories and models. 164

Table 4-3 and Table 4-4 contain a list of the impact categories considered as robust and non-robust 165 that have been screened for metal sheets and shall be declared in the PEF. 166

Table 4-3: Impact Assessment Category Descriptions considered as robust /PEF Guide 2013/179/EU/ 167

19

EF Impact Category EF Impact Assessment Model EF Impact Category indicators

Source

Climate Change Bern model - Global Warming Potentials (GWP) over a 100 year time horizon.

kg CO2 equivalent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007

Ozone Depletion EDIP model based on the ODPs of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) over an infinite time horizon.

kg CFC-11 equivalent WMO, 1999

Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics

RiskPoll model kg PM2,5 equivalent Humbert, 2009

Ionising Radiation – human health effects

Human Health effect model kBq U235 equivalent (to air)

Dreicer et al., 1995

Photochemical Ozone Formation

LOTOS-EUROS model kg NMVOC equivalent Van Zelm et al., 2008 as applied in ReCiPe

Acidification Accumulated Exceedance model mol H+ eq Seppälä et al.,2006; Posch et al., 2008

Eutrophication – terrestrial

Accumulated Exceedance model mol N eq Seppälä et al.,2006; Posch et al., 2008

Eutrophication – aquatic (freshwater)

EUTREND model fresh water: kg P equivalent

Struijs et al., 2009 as implemented in ReCiPe

Eutrophication – aquatic (marine)

EUTREND model marine: kg N equivalent Struijs et al., 2009 as implemented in ReCiPe

Resource Depletion – water

Swiss Ecoscarcity model m3 water use related to local scarcity of water

Frischknecht et al., 2008

Land use Soil Organic Matter (SOM) model Kg (C deficit) Milà i Canals et al., 2007

168

The impact categories listed in the following table, at present stage can’t be considered robust 169 because of the limitations of the methodologies. 170

Table 4-4: Impact Assessment Category Descriptions considered as non-robust /PEF Guide 2013/179/EU/ 171

EF Impact Category EF Impact Assessment Model

EF Impact Category indicators Source

Ecotoxicity for aquatic fresh wate

USEtox model CTUe (Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems)

Rosenbaum et al., 2008

Human Toxicity - cancer effects USEtox model CTUh (Comparative Toxic Unit for humans)


Human Toxicity – non-cancer effects

USEtox model CTUh (Comparative Toxic Unit for humans)


Resource Depletion – mineral, fossil

CML2002 model kg antimony (Sb) equivalent van Oers at al., 2008

172

The rationale for considering the Toxicity and Resource depletion categories not sufficiently robust is 173 explained in Annex XIV. 174

4.6 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 175

According to [2013/179/EU, section 4.5] additional environmental information may include “(b) 176 Disassembling ability, recyclability, recoverability, reusability information, resource efficiency”. 177

Recycling and end of life stage 178

For the manufacturing of metal sheets as intermediate products the above listed additional 179 information is essential, because it is crucial to consider properly the recycling aspects over the full 180 life cycle for metal-containing products. 181

20

The metals industry recommends to not only apply the obligatory default equation (the so-called 182 Annex V formula) as stated in the PEF Guidance document but to apply also the integrated equation 183 for cradle to grave environmental footprinting and its modular version (module D equation) for cases 184 where the results need to be decomposed into various life cycle stages, such as in the case of an 185 intermediate product. Consequently this results in three different formulas to be applied in the 186 context of this PEFCR. 187

More information about the equations and the rationale behind their recommendation can be found 188 in section 5.8 and Annex XIV. 189

Delayed emissions 190

Credits due to temporary carbon storage shall not be considered. The models shall assume that 191 manufacturing and end-of-life take place at the same time. Hence, any effects that would arise, if 192 manufacturing and end-of-life are separated in time are neglected. This is considered as a conservative 193 approach. Delayed emissions may be included as “additional environmental information” according 194 to the PEF Guide. The TS however recommends not to include information on delayed emissions in 195 the PEF. 196

Biodiversity 197

The PEF results for Climate Change; Acidification; Eutrophication – terrestrial; Eutrophication – aquatic 198 (freshwater); Eutrophication – aquatic (marine); Water Scarcity; and Land Use collectively address 199 potential impacts on biodiversity.1 As biodiversity impacts may also arise from site-based practices 200 rather than material flows, it may in future be possible to indicate under Additional Environmental 201 Information if a material risk of biodiversity impacts resulting from site-based practices is identified. 202 In most jurisdictions, mining operations assess potential biodiversity impacts through Environmental 203 Impact Assessment and as part of their licence to operate have management plans in place where 204 appropriate. Voluntary responsible sourcing schemes may also be applicable (e.g., disclosure of 205 biodiversity data as part of the Global Reporting Initiative). 206

4.7 ASSUMPTIONS/LIMITATIONS 207

In PEF studies, limitations to carrying out the analysis may arise and therefore assumptions need to 208 be made. For example, generic data may not completely represent the reality of the product analysed 209 and may be adapted for better representation. 210

Any deviations from the PEFCR and any limitation and assumptions shall be transparently reported 211 and justified. For example, it is acknowledged that the environmental profile of the pretreatment of 212 scrap in most cases are not availaible. The absence of data does not mean that there is no 213 environmental impact. 214

Company- and/or site-specific data collection shall always be preferred (see details in chapter 5 and 215 Annex XI and Annex XII), but in the case that site- or company-specific data are not available or cannot 216 be collected, the metal industry considers that industry averaged datasets are an appropriate proxy. 217 These Industry averaged datasets are externally reviewed and are regularly updated by industry 218 associations, thereby ensuring that datasets are up-to-date, accurate and representative of the 219 current market situation. The inclusion of multiple data sources in an average dataset helps to 220

1 Global Reporting Initiative (2007) Biodiversity a GRI Reporting Resource

21

neutralize the significance of any data collection errors linked to individually collected company or site 221 data. 222

It should be acknowledged that production streams can cover applications that fall outside the scope 223 of this PEFCR. As a result, product/application specific data collection may not be possible. 224

For the intermediate product “metal sheet”, the impact of packaging can be considered as negligible. 225

It is recognised that this draft PEFCR does not take into account the data sets selected by the 226 Commission, nor all of the latest rules on horizontal issues, as they had not been adopted at the time 227 of writing. 228

22

5 RESOURCE USE AND EMISSION PROFILE 229

The following flow chart should guide the user in the application of this PEFCR. 230

231

Figure 5-1: Flow chart for the application of this PEFCR 232

In addition to the simplified procedure and the guiding documents the topics on the left are to be 233 evaluated within or after the supporting studies. 234

5.1 SCREENING STEP 235

Based on the hot-spot analysis in the screening study [SCREENING 2015] the following most relevant 236 impact categories, life cycle stages, processes and flows were identified and should act as a guideline 237 for the application of this PEFCR. 238

The hot-spot analysis is based on the TAB rules concerning screening and hot spot analysis in version 239 4.0 released on 24 April 2015 [JAMES, GALATOLA 2015], which is also included in the updated Guidance 240 document version 5.1 (September 2015). 241

NOTE: For the sake of consistency, the results of the supporting studies shall be displayed in the 242 same format as the hot spot analysis is presented. 243

23

Hence, the following procedure was applied to assess the most relevant impact categories, most 244 relevant life cycle stages, most relevant processes and most relevant flows to identify the hot-spots. 245

Table 5-1: Applied procedure to define most relevant contributions and hot-spots [James, Galatola 2015] 246

Item Procedure

Most relevant impact categories Starting from normalized and weighted results No threshold applied. Since metal sheet is identified as an intermediate product, all impact categories

are relevant. The TS decided to differentiate between robust and non-robust impact categories in general and for communication purposes.

Most relevant life cycle stages All life cycle stages contributing cumulatively more than 80% to any impact category

Most relevant processes All processes contributing cumulatively more than 80% to any impact category

Most relevant elementary flows All elementary flows contributing cumulatively more than 80% to any impact category per most relevant process and all those contributing more

than 5% individually

Hotspots Per impact category, the most relevant life cycle stages, processes and elementary flows based on the procedure described above.

247

In Figure 5-2 the above listed items are divided into internal and external application purposes. 248

249

Figure 5-2: Hotspots process according to [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2] 250

5.1.1 Most relevant life cycle stages 251

For the most relevant life cycle stage for each impact category see ANNEX XVI. For a more detailed 252 analysis see screening report. 253

5.1.2 Most relevant process 254

For the most relevant process for each impact category see ANNEX XVI. For a more detailed analysis 255 see screening report. 256

24

5.1.3 Most relevant flows 257

For the most relevant flows for each impact category see ANNEX XVI. For a more detailed analysis see 258 screening report. 259

5.1.4 Hot spots 260

The summary tables on hot-spots based on OPTION B according to the TAB rules in version 4.0 261 released on 24 April 2015 [JAMES, GALATOLA 2015] are included in ANNEX XVI. As the identification of 262 hot-spots are based on relative contributions, the tables are included per material not per 263 representative product. 264

5.1.5 Summary of relevancy and hot spots 265

The following tables, i.e. Table 5-2, Table 5-3, Table 5-4 and Table 5-5, provide an overview of all 266 findings and guidance of relevance and hot spots for metal sheets. 267

268

25

Table 5-2: hot spot summary aluminium 269

270

Aluminium

Production of

main product Use phase EoL

Impact Category Mining & Concentration Smelting & Refining Rolling

Acidification, accumulated exceedance

Sulphur dioxide,

Nitrogen oxides Sulphur dioxide

Ecotoxicity for aquatic fresh water, USEtox (recommended)

Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V),

Zinc (+II), Nickel (+II)


Zinc (+II), Nickel (+II)

Freshwater eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Phosphorus Phosphorus, Phosphate

Human toxicity cancer effects, USEtox (recommended) Mercury (+II)

Human toxicity non-canc. effects, USEtox (recommended)

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V),

Formaldehyde (methanal)

Ionising radiation, human health effect model, ReCiPe Carbon (C14) Carbon (C14)

IPCC global warming, excl biogenic carbon Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide

IPCC global warming, incl biogenic carbon

Marine eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Nitrogen oxides Nitrogen oxides

Ozone depletion, WMO model, ReCiPe

R 114

(dichlorotetrafluoroethane)

Particulate matter/Respiratory inorganics, RiskPoll

Dust (PM2.5 - PM10), Sulphur

dioxide

Dust (PM2.5 - PM10),

Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5)

Photochemical ozone formation, LOTOS-EUROS model, ReCiPe Nitrogen oxide

Sulphur dioxide, Nitrogen

oxides

Resource Depletion, fossil and mineral, reserve Based, CML2002 Bauxite

Fluorspar (calcium fluoride;

fluorite)

Terrestrial eutrophication, accumulated exceedance Nitrogen oxides Nitrogen oxides

Resource Depleation -water-

Water (river water from

technosphere. turbined),

Water (river water)

Land use, Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

From industrial

area, To

industrial area

Raw material acquisition and pre-processing)

please see

additional

environmental

information

chapter

excluded

26

Table 5-3: hot spot summary copper 271

272

Copper

Production of


Impact Category Mining & Concentration Smelting & Refining

Secondary

Material

Production Rolling


Sulphur dioxide,

Nitrogen oxides Sulphur dioxide,



Zinc (+II)


Zinc (+II)

Freshwater eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Phosphorus Phosphorus, Phosphate

Human toxicity cancer effects, USEtox (recommended)


Chromium (+VI) Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V)


Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), Lead

(+II)


Zinc (+II)

Ionising radiation, human health effect model, ReCiPe Carbon (C14) Carbon (C14) Carbon (C14)

IPCC global warming, excl biogenic carbon Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide

IPCC global warming, incl biogenic carbon

Marine eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe

Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate,

Ammonium/ammonia Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate


R 114

(dichlorotetrafluo

roethane)

R 114

(dichlorotetrafluoro

ethane)


Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5),

Dust (PM2.5 - PM10) Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM10)

Dust (PM10), Dust

(PM2.5)

Photochemical ozone formation, LOTOS-EUROS model, ReCiPe Nitrogen oxide Nitrogen oxides

Resource Depletion, fossil and mineral, reserve Based, CML2002 Bauxite Vanadium





Water (river water)


From industrial

area, To industrial

area

excluded

please see

additional

environmental

information

chapter


27

Table 5-4: hot spot summary lead 273

274

LEAD

Production of


Impact Category Mining & Concentration Smelting & Refining

Secondary

Material

Production Rolling


Sulphur dioxide,

Nitrogen oxides Sulphur dioxide,


Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc

(+II)

Copper (+II),

Arsenic (+V), Zinc

(+II)

Freshwater eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Phosphate Phosphorus

Human toxicity cancer effects, USEtox (recommended)

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Lead

(+II)


Lead (+II)


Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Lead

(+II)


Lead (+II)

Ionising radiation, human health effect model, ReCiPe Carbon (C14) Carbon (C14) Carbon (C14)

IPCC global warming, excl biogenic carbon Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide

Marine eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate

Nitrogen oxides,

Nitrate,

Ammonium/amm

onia


R 114

(dichlorotetrafluoroethane)

R 114

(dichlorotetrafluo

roethane)


Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5),

Nitrogen oxides Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5) Sulphur dioxide

Photochemical ozone formation, LOTOS-EUROS model, ReCiPe Nitrogen oxide

Sulphur dioxide,

Nitrogen oxide

Resource Depletion, fossil and mineral, reserve Based, CML2002 Silver, Lead





Water (river water)

Water (river

water from

technosphere.

turbined), Water

(river water)


From industrial

area, To industrial

area

excluded

please see

additional

environmental

information

chapter


28

Table 5-5: hot spot summary steel 275

276

277

STEEL

Production of


Impact Category Virgen Material production Smelting & Refining

Secondary

Material

Production Rolling


Sulphur dioxide,

Nitrogen oxides

Sulphur dioxide,

Nitrogen oxides

Ecotoxicity for aquatic fresh water, USEtox (recommended) Zinc (+II)

Zinc (+II), Sulphuric

Acid

Freshwater eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Phosphorus Phosphorus Phosphorus

Human toxicity cancer effects, USEtox (recommended) Mercury (+II), Lead (+II)

Mercury (+II),

Arsenic (+V)

Human toxicity non-canc. effects, USEtox (recommended) Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), Lead (+II


Lead (+II)

Mercury (+II), Zinc

(+II)

Ionising radiation, human health effect model, ReCiPe Carbon (C14) Carbon (C14)

IPCC global warming, excl biogenic carbon Carbon dioxide

Marine eutrophication, EUTREND model, ReCiPe Nitrogen oxides, Nitrogen

Nitrogen oxides,

Nitrogen


R 114

(dichlorotetrafluoroethane), R

11 (trichlorofluoromethane)

Particulate matter/Respiratory inorganics, RiskPoll Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5)

Sulphur dioxide,

Dust (PM2.5)

Photochemical ozone formation, LOTOS-EUROS model, ReCiPe

Nitrogen oxide, Carbon

Monoxid

Resource Depletion, fossil and mineral, reserve Based, CML2002

Tantalum, Vanadium, iron ore,

copper Tantalum



Water (river

water from

technosphere.

turbined), Water

(river water)

Water (river water

from

technosphere.

turbined), Water

(river water)


From industrial

area, To industrial

area

excluded

please see

additional

environmental

information

chapter


29

5.2 DATA QUALITY REQUIREMENTS 278

The data quality requirements defined in PEF pilot Guidance V5.2 are applicable for the PEFCR for 279 metal sheets. 280

The data quality rating shall be calculated for foreground data as well as for background data as 281 described in ANNEX XVII of this document and with the following formula. 282

DQR6

EoLPCGRTeRTiR 283

• DQR : Data Quality Rating of the dataset 284 • TeR: Technological Representativeness 285 • GR: Geographical Representativeness 286 • TiR: Time-related Representativeness 287 • C: Completeness; 288 • P: Precision/uncertainty; 289 • EoL: Implementation of the End-of-Life baseline formula. 290 291 NOTE: Until the EF-compliant datasets are available, the above formula shall be applied without the 292 Eol parameter (and hence divided by five) for secondary datasets. For newly created datasets, the 293 formula with six parameters shall be applied. This is a temporary solution only – after the pilot 294 phase, the 6 parameters will be applied for all datasets. 295

When preparing a PEF specifically the representativeness (i.e. TeR, TiR and GR) of the provided 296 datasets applied for the boundary conditions of the PEF study needs to be considered, accordingly 297 newly rated and provided as part of the PEF. In case of new data acquisition all parameters need to 298 be evaluated with respective information. 299

5.3 REQUIREMENTS REGARDING FOREGROUND SPECIFIC DATA COLLECTION 300

Foreground process refers to the core process in the life cycle for which direct access to information 301 is available. 302

Specific company data shall be used for the metal sheet producer’s core processes: rolling and 303 finishing (and melting and casting if included in the core process system boundary). Typically, the 304 specific company refers to situation 1 of Table 5-6 in chapter 5.4. Therefore primary data are typically 305 necessary to be collected with a minimum quality rating of DQR ≤1.6, see chapter 5.2 and Table 5-6. 306

A basic requirement for all data used in the PEF environment is that it shall be compliant with the 307 entry level (EL) requirements of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD). All needed 308 information, including guidance on the DQR of the data, can be found in Annex F of the /PEF pilot 309 Guidance V5.2/ and also ANNEX XVII of this PEFCR. 310

As guidance beyond the DQR descriptions, the following requirements shall be applied for collection 311 of the specific data: 312

- The data shall be collected in accordance with the applied technology and the expected 313 material and energy flows as well as expected burdens of the processes 314

- The data shall include all known inputs and outputs for the (typical) core processes of the 315 PEFCR user, including input of primary metal/recycled metal, energy, water, additives , 316

30

disposal of waste/production residues, consideration of related emissions to air and water, 317 and recycling of production scrap 318

- Information on the source of data (example direct measurements) and methodology used for 319 calculations shall be provided. 320

- The data collection shall cover 12 months that are representative for the metal sheet 321 produced. 322

A list that can be used as data collection guide summarising typical flows (elementary and activity 323 flows) for the core processes is given in ANNEX XI – Foreground data. Since the metal primary 324 production usually dominates the environmental impact of the metal sheet, it is crucial to address and 325 apply the following parameters for the PEF calculations: 326

Type of metal 327

Thickness 328

Grammage 329

R1, if applicable R1,i 330

R2, if applicable R2,i 331

These parameters specify the metal product / intermediate under consideration and should be 332 extended by collection of primary data of relevant input and output flows as described above. 333

Currently the core processes of any of the metals faces at least one impact category that calculates 334 the core process as “most relevant process”, which depends on the fact that land use, SOM, was not 335 reflected in today’s available secondary datasets. After closing this data gap, most presumably the 336 core process will not be a “most relevant process” for the various metals anymore. In such a case the 337 specific company can select Situation 1, option 2 of Table 5-6 in chapter 5.4. 338

In such a case, the relevant secondary dataset for this case is provided in ANNEX XII – Background 339 data. 340

5.4 REQUIREMENTS REGARDING BACKGROUND GENERIC DATA AND DATA GAPS 341

For all applicable generic data, that are also called secondary data, certain guidelines and minimum 342 quality requirements have to be regarded, see [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU, section 5.8] and ANNEX XII – 343 Background data. 344

For metal sheets, industry averaged data shall be used instead of multi-sector generic data /PEF Guide 345 2013/179/EU/. All industry averaged datasets shall fulfil the data quality requirements specified in 346 /PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/. The sources of the data used shall be clearly documented and reported in 347 the PEF documentation. 348

In consequence of this and in accordance with the Table 5-6, the following procedure for selection of 349 secondary datasets is defined by this PEFCR: 350

Step 1: determine your situation (1, 2 or 3) depending on your role for this PEFCR. 351

Step 2: determine on your situation as identified in step 1 and on base of the screening results 352 (most relevant phases, processes, flows and hot spot analysis), see chapter 5.1, whether left 353 column (“most relevant process”) or right column of Table 5-6 applies and select your 354 envisaged option (if applicable). 355

31

Note: Please be aware that the selection of R1 has a significant influence on the relevancy of 356 phases, processes and flows. Thus, the provided hot spot analysis (ANNEX XVI) is only relevant 357 for the R1 value of the corresponding screening report. 358

Step 3: depending on decision of step 2, either follow data collection and quality rating guide 359 of chapter 5.3 and ANNEX XI – Foreground data or refer to the secondary dataset as described 360 in ANNEX XII – Background data. 361

Step 4: recalculate the DQR, see chapter 5.2 and ANNEX XVII. 362

Step 5: mark new data or processes in order to allow verification. In case new datasets or 363 processes that substitute secondary datasets, the DQR needs to be at least equal or better 364 than the DQR of the available secondary dataset. 365

366

32

Table 5-6: Dataset needs matrix (DNM) according to /PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/ 367

Most relevant process Other process

Sit

uati

on

1:

pro

cess

run

by t

he

com

pan

y a

pply

ing

the

PE

FC

R

Op

tion

1 Provide company-specific data (as

requested in the PEFCR) and create a

company specific dataset partially

disaggregated at least at level 12 (DQR

≤1.6).

Provide company-specific data (as

requested in the PEFCR) and create a

company specific dataset partially


≤1.6). O

pti

on

2

Use default secondary dataset, in

aggregated form (DQR ≤3.0)

Sit

uati

on

2:

pro

cess

not

run b

y

the

com

pan

y a

pply

ing t

he

PE

FC

R

but

wit

h a

cces

s to

com

pan

y-

spec

ific

info

rmat

ion

Op

tion

1 Provide company-specific activity data

(as requested in the PEFCR) and create

a company specific dataset partially


≤1.6).



Op

tion

2

Starting from the default secondary

dataset provided in the PEFCR, use

company-specific activity data for

transport (distance), and substitute the

sub-processes used for electricity mix

and transport with supply-chain specific

PEF compliant datasets. The newly

created dataset shall have a DQR ≤3.0.

Sit

uati

on

3:

pro

cess

not

run b

y t

he

com

pan

y a

pply

ing t

he

PE

FC

R a

nd w

ithout

acce

ss t

o c

om

pan

y-

spec

ific

info

rmat

ion

Op

tion

1



368 The following paragraphs provide guidance per situation and option of Table 5-6: 369

The most significantly contributing processes for the representative products across all metals were 370 identified as mining and concentration as well as smelting and refining and only in case of lead and 371 steel for some impact categories secondary material processing. However the determination of R1 372 significantly influences the significance of processes and life cycle phases3. Therefore each case per 373 product case needs investigation and determination which process contributes how much by applying 374 the secondary datasets as default datasets. 375

Situation 1 (i.e. the specific company is under control of the process): 376

Option 1 (both cases): Go for primary data collection, see chapter 5.3. 377

2 The underlying sub-processes might be based on PEF-compliant secondary datasets.

3 As example the extreme values of R1 = 1 would eliminate primary metal and thus exclude mining from

significance or R1 = 0 would maximize significance of mining that possibly smelting and refining would be

reduced to not significant.

33

Option 2, “other process”: Refer to respective dataset(s) in ANNEX XII – Background data and 378 determine the additionally important values, e.g. metal, thickness, grammage, R1 and R2, in 379 order to scale datasets appropriately, see also chapter 5.3 380

Situation 2 (i.e. the specific company has no direct control of the process, but has access to company-381 specific information): 382

Option 1, “most relevant process”: Go for primary data collection of the considered process, 383 see chapter 5.3 384

Option 2, “most relevant process”: this shall be excluded and is not applicable due to 385 confidentiality reasons and non-applicability reasons of the provided industry data 386

Option 1 and 2 “other process”: Refer to respective dataset(s) in ANNEX XII – Background data 387 and determine the additionally important values, e.g. metal, thickness, grammage, R1 and R2, 388 in order to scale datasets appropriately, see also chapter 5.3 389

Situation 3 (i.e. the specific company has no access to any of the processes): 390

Option 1, “most relevant process”: Refer to respective dataset(s) in ANNEX XII – Background 391 data and determine the additionally important values, e.g. metal, thickness, grammage, R1 392 and R2, in order to scale datasets appropriately, see also chapter 5.3. 393

Option 1, “other process”: Refer to respective dataset(s) in ANNEX XII – Background data and 394 determine the additionally important values, e.g. metal, thickness, grammage, R1 and R2, in 395 order to scale datasets appropriately, see also chapter 5.3. 396

It has to be noted, that the different DQR requirement for secondary datasets of situation 1 and 2 in 397 case of “most relevant process” compared to “other process” (see Table 5-6) is irrelevant, since either 398 primary data can be collected or industry data as described in ANNEX XII – Background data shall be 399 applied, that will provide DQR ≤3.0 in any case. 400

5.5 DATA GAPS 401

In case there is no specific or generic data available that is sufficiently representative of the given 402 process in the product’s life cycle, it should be filled with a data collection or a selection of available 403 datasets that is a best available proxy. In case of new data collection the same rules as for a core 404 process are applicable following chapter 5.3 and ANNEX XI – Foreground data. In case of selection of 405 secondary dataset procedure and lists as described in chapter 5.4 and ANNEX XII – Background data 406 are applicable. The selection of a best proxy from the list of available datasets should be based on 407 relevant expert judgement (such as sector experts) and shall be accompanied with a short explanation 408 respectively documentation. 409

Any data gaps shall be filled using the best available generic or extrapolated data. The contribution of 410 such data (including gaps in generic data) shall not account for more than 10 % of the overall 411 contribution to each environmental footprint (EF) impact category considered. 412

5.6 USE STAGE 413

As explained earlier, this stage is not applicable for intermediate metal sheets. 414

5.7 LOGISTICS 415

Primary data for transport should be collected. 416

If no primary data for transport is available, representative estimates of actual transport modes, 417 loading factors, and transport distances (e.g. for road transport, a default load factor of 80% and a 418

34

generic EURO 4 truck with a payload of 34-40t) shall be provided and justified. The transport of the 419 metal sheet for the fabrication is outside of the scope of this PEFCR 420

5.8 END-OF-LIFE STAGE AND RELATED PEF EQUATION 421

The End of Life scenario for metal sheets shall be described in the PEF documentation. 422

Scenarios shall only model processes e.g. recycling systems that have been proven to be economically 423 and technically viable. Scenarios shall not include processes or procedures that are not in current use 424 or which have not been demonstrated to be practical. The scenario parameters, especially R2 and 425 Qs/Qp, shall be based on today practices and shall be documented and justified. 426

Since recycled material can be both an input to the production stage and an output of the end-of-life 427 stage, it is essential to use a methodology which allows reconciling consistently the recycling aspects 428 of these two different life cycle stages. The baseline recycling equation (Annex V) as required by the 429 PEF Guide [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU] has to be applied. The metal industry recommends to not only 430 apply the obligatory default equation as stated in the PEF Guidance document but to apply also the 431 integrated equation for cradle to grave environmental footprinting and its modular version (module 432 D equation) for cases where the results need to be decomposed into various life cycle stages such as 433 in the case of an intermediate product. Consequently this results in three different formulas to be 434 applied in the context of this PEFCR. 435

Any loss in the recycling chain should be quantified. 436

Further details about the integrated equation (IE) and its application can be found in ANNEX XIV. 437

5.9 REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIFUNCTIONAL PRODUCTS AND MULTIPRODUCTS 438

If within a specific PEF for metal sheet multifunctional products and multiproducts are applicable the 439 recommendation of the PEF guide shall be followed: 440

Requirements from the PEF Guidance: 441

[Specify multi-functionality solutions and clearly justify with reference to the PEF multifunctionality 442 solution hierarchy. Where subdivision is applied, specify which processes are to be sub-divided and 443 how to subdivide the process by specifying the principles that such subdivision should adhere to. 444 Where system expansion is used, specify which processes are added to the system. Where allocation 445 by physical relationship is applied, specify the relevant underlying physical relationships to be 446 considered, and establish the relevant allocation factors or rules. Where allocation by some other 447 relationship is applied, specify this relationship and establish the relevant allocation factors or rules.] 448

The following tables show common approaches, recommendations and rationales for co-products of 449 base metals based on the Harmonization of LCA Methodologies for Metals paper [ICMM 2014]. In 450 addition, allocation rules for by-products from metals production are listed in Table 5-10. 451

Table 5-7: Co-product approaches, recommendations, and rationales for base metals 452

Co-product type Approach Recommendation / Rationale

Base metals Preferred approach

35


(Co-products

include only base

metals that are

found within the

same mine)

Examples:

- copper

- molybdenum

- nickel

- lead

- zinc

Mass allocation

(metal)

Mass is a consistent physical property of the metal and allows for a

geographic and temporal consistency. Although mass does not

capture the economic purpose for extracting and refining multiple

metals, differences in market value between many base metals are

generally relatively small. From a physical perspective, the same

effort is needed to extract a unit mass of ore, regardless of the metal

type or content. For base metal co-products with large market value

differences, economic allocation should be considered.

Mass allocation

(total)

Use as appropriate

Allocation by total mass may be appropriate when various metals in

the ore are combined or are otherwise difficult to separate using other

allocation methods. As with allocation by mass of metal, allocation

by total mass captures the physical effort needed to extract a unit mass

of ore. Allocation by total mass does not account for different

quantities of the metal co-products in the ore; allocation by mass of

metal is generally preferred due to this limitation.

Economic

allocation

Use as appropriate

Economic allocation may be appropriate when there are relatively

large differences in the market value of the base metals. In these

cases, allocation by mass of metal does not adequately capture the

economic purpose for extracting and refining the base metals. If

chosen, market data should be averaged over a long time span (10-

year average is recommended) so as to minimize the effect of price

volatility.

Note: it may be appropriate to allocate upstream processes (e.g.,

mining and concentration) using mass of metal and downstream

processes (e.g., smelting and refining) using economic allocation.

System

expansion

Preferred approach (when data is available)

System expansion is preferred when LCI data for mono-output

alternative routes are available for the co-products. In case of metals,

mono-output alternative routes, or the LCI data associated with those

routes, are often not available for the co-products; allocation should

be used in these instances.

Table 5-8: Co-product approaches, recommendations, and rationales for precious and rare metals 453


Precious metals Preferred approach

36


(Co-products

include precious

metals that are

found with other

base or precious

metals in the

same mine)

Examples

- silver

- gold

- platinum

group metals

Economic

allocation

Economic allocation accounts for the large disproportionately high

market value of precious metals and the corresponding differences in

price between metal co-products. Economic allocation captures the

economic purpose for extracting and refining metals. If chosen,

market data should be averaged over a long time span (10-year

average is recommended) so as to minimize the effect of price

volatility.

Mass allocation

(metal)

Use as appropriate

Mass allocation does not account for the large differences in price

between precious metals and base metals. However, in certain

instances (e.g., where price is highly variable or uncertain), it may be

necessary or useful to allocate co-products using the mass of metal

content.

Note: it may be appropriate to allocate upstream processes (e.g.,

mining and concentration) using mass of metal and downstream

processes (e.g., smelting and refining) using economic allocation.

Mass allocation

(total)

Use as appropriate

Similar to allocation by mass of metal, allocation by total mass may

be necessary when economic allocation is not possible. Allocation by

total mass (i.e., total ore) may be appropriate when various metals in

the ore are combined are otherwise difficult to separate using other

allocation methods. As with allocation by mass of metal, allocation

by total mass captures the physical effort needed to extract a unit mass

of ore. Allocation by total mass does not account for different

quantities of the metal co-products in the ore. Allocation by mass of

metal is generally preferred due to this limitation.

System

expansion*

Preferred approach (when data is available)

System expansion is preferred when LCI data for mono-output

alternative routes are available for the co-products. In case of metals,

mono-output alternative routes, or the LCI data associated with those

routes, are often not available for the co-products; allocation should

be used in these instances.

*It is acknowledged that this is not an allocation method but rather a

method of avoiding its application according to ISO standards.

454

37

Table 5-9: Co-product approaches, recommendations, and rationales for non-metal co-products 455


Non-metals

(Metals with

production of

non-metal

products)

System

expansion

Preferred approach

Alternative production routes are often available for non-metal co-

products, making this a preferred approach for dealing with co-

products. System expansion can be used for slags, process gases, and

other non-metal co-products.

Physical

allocation/

partitioning

(mass, energy,

chemical etc.)

Use with caution

Allocation/partitioning of non-metal co-products by physical means

may be appropriate when information (e.g., LCI data) for the co-

product is unavailable

Economic

allocation

Use with caution

Allocation of non-metal co-products by market value may be

appropriate when information (e.g., LCI data) for the co-product is

unavailable. Economic allocation accounts for the economic purpose

for generating co-products. If chosen, market data should be averaged

over a long time span (10-year average is recommended) so as to

minimize the effect of price volatility.

Mass allocation

(metal) n/a

456

Table 5-10: Allocation rules to be used for metal by-products 457

Co-Product Allocation rules

(non-exhaustive) Aluminium

List of by-products

Dross

Mass of Aluminium metal, i.e.

considering the metal

aluminium fraction (about

60%)

Salt slag

Mass of Aluminium metal, i.e.

considering the metal

aluminium fraction (about

30%)

(non-exhaustive) Iron and Steel

List of by-products

Coke Production:

Coke oven gas

Benzene

Tar

System expansion or sub-

division of processes based on

energy and other inherent

physical/chemical realtionships

of inputs and outputs.

Approximate energy split 83%

coke : 17% by-products

38

Toluene

Xylene

Sulphuric acid

Ammonia

Hot Metal Production:

Blast furnace gas

Blast furnace slag





of inputs and outputs.

Approximate energy split: 95%

Hot metal and gas: 5% slag

(values to be confirmed)

Steel Production:

Basic oxygen furnace gas

Steel slag





of inputs and outputs .

Approximate energy split: 86%

steel and gas : 14% slag (values

to be confirmed)

(non-exhaustive) Copper

List of by-products

Ore/Concentrate co-products

Ore type (e.g. low grade, sulfidic,

oxidic)

Molybdenum concentrate

Other metal concentrates

Mass allocation: shared burden

according to the mass fraction

of metal content

Metal co-products

Gold

Silver

Nickel sulphate

PGM (platinum group metals)

Other metals

Allocation by metal exchange

market value (e.g. LME) using

10 years average price

Non-metal co-products

Sulphuric acid

Steam

Iron silica sand

System expansion using

alternative production routes:

e.g.

- Iron silica

sand=gravel

39

Other slags (containing metals) - Steam=alternative

steam

- …

(non-exhaustive) Lead Sheet

List of by-products

Dross Mass of lead metal, i.e.

considering the metal lead

fraction (about 70%)

458

5.10 GUIDANCE FOR DETERMINING EQUATION PARAMETERS 460

Reflecting adequately the recycling situation of metal sheet is crucial to assess its PEF profile. This 461 necessity is further explained in ANNEX XIV, which also includes a guidance for determining the 462 equation parameters. 463

40

6 BENCHMARK AND CLASSES OF ENVIRONMENTAL 464

PERFORMANCE 465

In the screening study /SCREENING 2015/, six representative products have been assessed following the 466 rules of the PEF methodology: four for the subcategory “building applications”: one for copper roofing, 467 one for lead roofing, one for aluminium roofing and one for steel flooring and two for the subcategory 468 “appliances”: aluminium and steel body sheets. 469

Note: The executive summary of the screening study is included in ANNEX XVIII – Screening Study. 470

The analysis of the impact of the recycling phase on the overall impact shows that it is important to 471 take the end of life recycling aspects into account when calculating the footprint of a metal sheet at 472 the intermediate status. 473

The scenarios for the two applications tested (building and appliances) differ from each other and this 474 means that those representative products of the same metal should not be combined at the 475 intermediate stage into one single product. 476

Each of the representative products have been tested with the most reliable data available at the time 477 of the study. The metal specific data originate from the most recent life cycle assessment studies 478 executed by the metals associations concerned and representing an overall industry average. 479

Each representative product has its own environmental footprint at the intermediate level and cannot 480 be compared to any of the other representative products at this level. Only when a function is well 481 defined and the life cycle assessment is performed on the entire life cycle of this final function 482 (including the use phase and the end of life stage), benchmarking could be considered 483

Since this condition is not met within this PEF pilot on metal sheets as intermediate products, no 484 preliminary indication about the definition of the product benchmark can be given. 485

If benchmarking is to be performed on the final product, it should be conducted with data collected 486 with consistent and comparable system boundaries. 487

41

7 INTERPRETATION 489

Within the development of a PEF Profile for metal sheets an interpretation shall be conducted and 490 reported including: 491

- Assessment of the robustness of the Product Environmental Footprint model (e.g. 492 completeness and consistency check), 493

- Identification of Hotspots (according to /PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/), which shall clearly 494 distinguish between: 495

1. Impact categories (communication); 496

2. life cycle stages (communication); 497

3. processes; (data related requirements) and 498

4. elementary flows (data related requirements). 499

- Estimation of Uncertainty (based on relevant expert judgement), 500

- Conclusions, Recommendations and Limitations. 501

NOTE: In case of deviating results to the screening study (e.g. different hot spots) the interpretation 502 shall go into further detail and evaluate whether this deviation can be explained by, for example, a 503 method change, technical aspects or the accuracy of dataset aspects. 504

Assessment of the robustness of the PEF model 505

Several indicators have been identified as non-robust by the metal industry due to the lack of 506 robustness and the high uncertainty associated of the LCIA model or/and the overall calculation 507 methodology These indicators are the three toxicity indicators using the USEtox methodology and the 508 “Abiotic depletion potential” (ADP) indicator (See Section 4.5). 509

Conclusions and hot spots from the screening study /SCREENING 2015/: 510

The screening study revealed that the life cycle stage that contributed most to the environmental 511 footprint of an intermediate metal sheet was metal production. Transformation processes (e.g. rolling 512 and casting) were revealed to have negligible influence. 513

The manufacturing stage including mining & concentration and the smelting & refining are the two 514 stages that contribute most to the overall potential environmental footprint impact. In general, the 515 additional mandatory information calculated from the end-of-life stage also contributes significantly 516 to the PEF profile of the metal sheet, which demonstrates the importance of integrating properly this 517 end of life stage and of considering the burdens and benefits associated with the end-of-life scenario. 518

It can generally be observed that within the manufacturing stage, the dominant process is the 519 production of energy and auxiliaries for virgin material production. However, if no primary material is 520 actually used in a particular supply chain (which is currently the case for lead sheet), potential 521 environmental hotspots can only realistically occur in the secondary production processes. Therefore 522 PEFCRs must specify an End-of-life formula that successfully provides the correct result for the range 523 of cases that exist in reality – the modular version of the integrated equation (See Section 5.8). 524

According to the PEF Pilot Guidance [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2], for intermediate product all impact 525 categories are relevant and shall be reported. Based on the experience from the screening study the 526 TS considers the following impact categories as being most suitable for communication purposes. 527

42

Table 7-1: Summary of PEF impact categories for communication 528

Impact category Recommended default LCIA method Classification according to ILCD

Climate Change (Global warming potential)

Baseline model of 100 years of the IPCC

I (recommended and satisfactory)

Acidification Accumulated Exceedance II (Recommended, some improvements needed)

Photochemical ozone formation LOTOS-EUROS II (Recommended, some improvements needed)

529

43

8 REPORTING, DISCLOSURE AND COMMUNICATION 530

[PEF pilot Guidance, section 3.14.]:”The PEF-profile could be communicated in different forms, 531 depending on the typology of communication (B2B or B2C) and the objective of the communication. 532 For example, the PEF-profile could be communicated through a PEF external communication report, 533 a PEF performance tracking report, a PEF declaration or a PEF label.” 534

8.1 PEF EXTERNAL COMMUNICATION REPORT 535

The companies that performed the supporting studies are testing relevant communication vehicles to 536 complete this chapter. 537

Aurubis is going to test the following communication vehicles: 538

1. PEF Declaration ( similar to Environmental Product Declaration on the basis on EN 15804 for 539 construction products) 540

2. PEF Performance Tracking Report - as described in the PEF guide that would allow comparison 541 of the profile over time and show improvement 542

3. PEF Information in printed product ( e.g. information on the environmental performance 543 included in a leaflet on copper sheet in architecture ) 544

The intention is also use a web site / social media for the purpose of distribution of the above 545 declaration/report 546

The target group will include customers of copper sheet for building applications, architects , NGO, 547 authorities ( e.g. related to environmental performance and resource efficiency) and an institute 548 performing studies on the environmental performance of products based on LCA. 549

Tata Steel will conduct communication using PEF EPD's, populated from the template created by the 550 metal sheets pilot. They will be tested with a number of stakeholders. 551

ArcelorMittal recommends to make uncertainty assessment a ‘default requirement’ on each impact 552 of profile report. This level of uncertainty shall be fully integrated in the communication format (e.g. 553 tables or graphs) of the environmental impact results. 554

KME will test the communication as follows: 555

Target audience 556

Installers 557

Designers 558

Prescribers 559 Tools 560

PEF Declaration 561

PEF Label 562

PEF leaflets 563

Barcode 564 Questions suggested: 565

Is the information in the label / PEF declaration understandable? 566

Does the results of the label or PEF report influence the decision making process? 567

44

Do audiences understand what the meaning of impact category is? Does the audience 568 understand what the meaning of R1, R2, and R3 is? 569

Are you convinced about the validity of the indicators / label? 570

What channel is better to inform you, a label in the product or Information in a dedicated 571 website? 572

The results of the impact categories: Climate change (CH), Eutrophication – freshwater (EP), 573 Photochemical Ozone Formation (POCP), Abiotic depletion mineral/fossil (ADP) 574

The value of the following indicators: R1 - Recycled (or reused) content, R2 - the potential 575 recyclability of the material, R3 – the proportion of the material that will be used for energy 576 recovery 577

Note: This part will be completed later during the last phase of the pilot phase based on findings of 578 the companies carrying out the PEFCR supporting studies on their applicability in communicating PEF 579 results. Until the completion of the communication testing, the following external communication 580 guideline from the PEF Guide can be used as guidance: 581

[PEF Guide 2013/179/EU]: “A PEF report provides a relevant, comprehensive, consistent, accurate, 582 and transparent account of the study and of the calculated environmental impacts associated with 583 the product. It reflects the best possible information in such a way as to maximize its usefulness to 584 intended current and future users, whilst honestly and transparently communicating limitations. 585 Effective PEF reporting requires that several criteria, both procedural (report quality) and substantive 586 (report content), are met. 587

The PEF report shall follow the structure and requirements on content described in the PEF 588 Commission Recommendation. Deviations from this Recommendation shall be justified in the report. 589

A PEF report consists of at least three elements: a Summary, the Main Report, and an Annex. 590 Confidential and proprietary information can be documented in a fourth element - a complementary 591 Confidential Report. Review reports are either annexed or referenced. 592

8.1.1 First element: Summary 593

The Summary shall be able to stand alone without compromising the results and 594 conclusions/recommendations (if included). The Summary shall fulfil the same criteria about 595 transparency, consistency, etc. as the detailed report. The Summary shall, as a minimum, include: 596

• Key elements of the goal and scope of the study with relevant limitations and assumptions; 597

• A description of the system boundary; 598

• The main results from the Resource Use and Emissions Profile and the EF impact assessment 599 components: these shall be presented in such a way as to ensure the proper use of the 600 information; the results shall be declared separately for each of the selected life cycle 601 stages. 602

• Summary of interpretation 603

• If applicable, environmental improvements compared to previous periods; 604

• Relevant statements about data quality, assumptions and value judgments; 605

• A description of what has been achieved by the study, any recommendations made and 606 conclusions drawn; 607

• Overall appreciation of the uncertainties of the results. 608

45

8.1.2 Second element: Main Report 609

The Main Report shall, as a minimum, include the following components: 610

Goal of the study - Mandatory reporting elements include, as a minimum: 611

Intended application(s); 612

Methodological or EF impact category limitations; 613

Reasons for carrying out the study; 614

Target audience; 615

Whether the study is intended for comparison or for comparative assertions to be 616 disclosed to the public; 617

Reference PCRs; 618

Commissioner of the study. 619

620

Scope of the study 621

The Scope of the study shall identify the analyzed system in detail and address the overall approach 622 used to establish the system boundaries. The Scope of the study shall also address data quality 623 requirements. Finally, the Scope shall include a description of the methods applied for assessing 624 potential environmental impacts and which EF impact categories are included. 625

Mandatory reporting elements include, as a minimum: 626

Unit of analysis and reference flow; 627

System boundaries, including omissions of life-cycle stages, processes or data needs, 628 quantification of energy and material inputs and outputs, assumptions about 629 electricity production, use and end-of-life stages; 630

The reasons for and potential significance of any exclusions; 631

All assumptions and value judgements, along with justifications for the assumptions 632 made; 633

Data representativeness, appropriateness of data, and types/ sources of required 634 data and information; 635

PEF impact categories, models and indicators; 636

normalisation and weighting factors (if used); 637

Treatment of any multi-functionality issues encountered in the PEF modelling activity. 638

639

Compiling and recording the Resource Use and Emissions Profile -Mandatory reporting elements 640 include, as a minimum: 641

Description and documentation of all unit process data collected; 642

Data collection procedures; 643

Sources of published literature; 644

Information on any use and end-of-life scenarios considered in downstream stages; 645

Calculation procedures; 646

Validation of data, including documentation and justification of allocation 647 procedures; 648

46

If a sensitivity analysis has been conducted, this shall be reported. 649

650

Calculating PEF impact assessment results - Mandatory reporting elements include: 651

The EF impact assessment procedure, calculations and results of the PEF study; 652

Limitation of the EF results relative to the defined goal and scope of the PEF study; 653

The relationship of the EF impact assessment results to the defined goal and scope; 654

If any exclusion from the default EF impact categories has been made, the justification 655 for the exclusion(s) shall be reported; 656

If any deviation from the default EF impact assessment methods has been made 657 (which shall be justified and included under additional environmental information), 658 then the mandatory reporting elements shall also include: 659

Impact categories and impact category indicators considered, including a rationale for 660 their selection and a reference to their source; 661

Description of or reference to all characterisation models, characterisation factors 662 and methods used, including all assumptions and limitations; 663

Description of or reference to all value-choices used in relation to the EF impact 664 categories, characterisation models, characterisation factors, normalisation, 665 grouping, weighting and a justification for their use and their influence on the results, 666 conclusions and recommendations; 667

A statement and justification of any grouping of the EF impact categories; 668

Any analysis of the indicator results, for example sensitivity and uncertainty analysis 669 on the use of other impact categories or additional environmental information, 670 including any implication for the results; 671

Additional environmental information, if any; 672

Information on carbon storage in products; 673

Information on delayed emissions; 674

data and indicator results reached prior to any normalisation; 675

If included, normalisation and weighting factors and results. 676

677

Interpreting PEF results - Mandatory reporting elements include: 678

Assessment of data quality; 679

Full transparency of value choices, rationale and expert judgements; 680

Identification of environmental hotspots; 681

Uncertainty (at least a qualitative description); 682

Conclusions, recommendations, limitations, and improvement potentials. 683

8.1.3 Third element: Annex 684

The Annex serves to document supporting elements to the main report which are of a more technical 685 nature. It shall include: 686

Descriptions of all assumptions, including those assumptions that have been shown to be irrelevant; 687

47

Critical review report, including (where applicable) the name and affiliation of 688 reviewer or review team, a critical review, responses to recommendations (if any); 689

Resource Use and Emissions Profile (optional if considered sensitive and 690 communicated separately in the Confidential Report, see below); 691

Reviewers’ self-declaration of their qualification, stating how many points they 692 achieved for each criterion defined in section 10.3 of this PEF Guide. 693

8.1.4 Fourth element: Confidential Annex 694

The Confidential Report is an optional reporting element that shall contain all those data (including 695 raw data) and information that are confidential or proprietary and cannot be made externally 696 available. It shall be made available confidentially to the critical reviewers.” 697

8.2 PEF PERFORMANCE TRACKING REPORT 698

[PEF pilot Guidance, section 3.14.2]: “PEF communication may take the form of a PEF performance 699 tracking report, which allows for the comparison of a PEF profile of a specific product over time with 700 respect to its original or previous PEF profile. The communication of the performance tracking report 701 shall be based on a specific PEF study and PEFCR requirements for that product category. When 702 communicating a change in a PEF profile to the public, the main contributions to the change shall be 703 specified. 704

Communication of performance tracking may be made when they are due to: 705

a) Improvements made by the reporting organization, 706

b) Selection of other suppliers, 707

c) Deliberate and verifiable improvements made by suppliers, 708

d) Improvements in the use stage and in the end-of-life stage made by improved product design or an 709 improved end-of-life procedure, 710

e) Changes due to process improvements. 711

Changes due to seasonal changes24 or finding better secondary data sources shall not be reported as 712 performance changes. 713

The communication may be supported by a graphical representation of the processes in the life cycle 714 of the product, which allows an understanding of the system boundary, the contribution to the PEF 715 profile and the changes included.” 716

8.3 PEF DECLARATION 717

1. Product 718

1.1. Product description 719

The declared products must be described. If averages are declared across various products, the 720 average breakdown must be explained. 721

1.2. Application 722

The designated application for the products referred to must be specified. 723

48

1.3. Technical Data 724

If relevant for the declared product, the following technical construction data in the delivery status 725 must be provided with reference to the test standard. 726

727

49

Table 8-1: Constructional data 728 Name Value Unit

Coefficient of thermal expansion 10-6K-1

Tensile strength N/mm2

Compressive strength N/mm2

Modulus of elasticity N/mm2

Melting point °C

Thermal conductivity W/(mK)

Electrical conductivity at 20°C Ω-1m-1

Density kg/m3 729

1.4. Base materials / Ancillary materials 730

The primary product components and/or materials must be indicated as a percentage mass to enable 731 the user of the PEF to understand the composition of the product in delivery status. This information 732 should also support safety and efficiency during installation, usage and disposal of the product. 733

2. LCA: Calculation rules 734

2.1. Unit of analysis 735

The unit of analysis, the mass reference and the conversion factor to 1 kg shall be indicated in the 736 appropriate table as declared. 737

Table 8-2: Unit of analysis 738 Name Value Unit

Unit of analysis m²

Conversion factor to 1 kg -

739

2.2. System boundary 740

Type of the PEF: cradle to gate, with mandatory additional environmental information (End-of-Life). 741

3. LCA: Scenarios and additional technical information 742

The following information is necessary for the declared modules. 743

Table 8-3: End of life 744 Name Value Unit

Reuse

Recycling

Energy recovery

Landfilling

745

746

50

4. LCA: Results 747

748 Table 8-4: Impact Assessment Category Descriptions considered as robust /PEF Guide 2013/179/EU/ 749 5. EF Impact Category EF Impact Assessment Model EF Impact Category

indicators Source

Climate Change Bern model - Global Warming Potentials (GWP) over a 100 year time horizon.

kg CO2 equivalent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007

Ozone Depletion EDIP model based on the ODPs of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) over an infinite time horizon.

kg CFC-11 equivalent WMO, 1999

Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics

RiskPoll model kg PM2,5 equivalent Humbert, 2009

Ionising Radiation – human health effects

Human Health effect model kBq U235 equivalent (to air)

Dreicer et al., 1995


LOTOS-EUROS model kg NMVOC equivalent Van Zelm et al., 2008 as applied in ReCiPe

Acidification Accumulated Exceedance model mol H+ eq Seppälä et al.,2006; Posch et al., 2008

Eutrophication – terrestrial

Accumulated Exceedance model mol N eq Seppälä et al.,2006; Posch et al., 2008

Eutrophication – aquatic (freshwater)

EUTREND model fresh water: kg P equivalent

Struijs et al., 2009 as implemented in ReCiPe

Eutrophication – aquatic (marine)

EUTREND model marine: kg N equivalent Struijs et al., 2009 as implemented in ReCiPe

Resource Depletion – water

Swiss Ecoscarcity model m3 water use related to local scarcity of water

Frischknecht et al., 2008

Land use Soil Organic Matter (SOM) model Kg (C deficit) Milà i Canals et al., 2007

750

The impact categories listed in the following table, at present stage can’t be considered robust for 751 communication purposes because of the limitations of the methodologies. 752

Table 8-5: Impact Assessment Category Descriptions considered as non-robust /PEF Guide 2013/179/EU/ 753

EF Impact Category EF Impact Assessment Model

EF Impact Category indicators Source

Ecotoxicity for aquatic fresh wate

USEtox model CTUe (Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems)


Human Toxicity - cancer effects USEtox model CTUh (Comparative Toxic Unit for humans)


Human Toxicity – non-cancer effects

USEtox model CTUh (Comparative Toxic Unit for humans)


Resource Depletion – mineral, fossil

CML2002 model kg antimony (Sb) equivalent van Oers at al., 2008

8.4 PEF LABEL 754

[PEF pilot Guidance V5.2]: “The use of a PEF label, i.e. a label reporting the classes of performances 755 for the most relevant environmental impact categories, may be tested in the framework of the EF 756 pilot phase. 757

This Guidance will be revised with further specifications once any decision concerning a PEF label will 758 be taken.” 759

The possibility of a label will be discussed at a later stage. 760

51

9 VERIFICATION 761

Information about the verification process will be added after the supporting studies. 762

52

10 REFERENCE LITERATURE 763

GUINÉE, 2001 Guinée et al, An operational guide to the ISO-standards, Centre for Milieukunde (CML), Leiden, the Netherlands, 2001

ISO 14040, 2006 ISO 14040 Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and Framework, 2006

ISO 14044, 2006 ISO 14044 Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines, 2006

ROSENBAUM, 2008 Rosenbaum et al, USEtox™—the UNEP-SETAC toxicity model: recommended characterisation factors for human toxicity and freshwater ecotoxicity in life cycle impact assessment, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment (2008) 13:532–546

VAN OERS, 2002 van Oers et al, Abiotic resource depletion in LCA: Improving characterisation factors abiotic resource depletion as recommended in the new Dutch LCA handbook, 2002

CPA, 2008 Regulation (EC) No 451/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 establishing a new statistical classification of products by activity (CPA) and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3696/93

NACE Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community (NACE), European Commission

SCREENING 2015 EUROMETAUX: Screening study for metal sheets, 2015

PEF pilot Guidance

Product Environmental Footprint Pilot Guidance, Guidance for the implementation of the EU Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) during the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase, version 4.0

PEF Guide 2013/179/EU

EUROPEAN COMMISSION: COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations (Text with EEA relevance) (2013/179/EU)

PEF pilot Guidance V5.2

Product Environmental Footprint Pilot Guidance, Guidance for the implementation of the EU Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) during the Environmental Footprint (EF) pilot phase, Version 5.2 - February 2016

MAKI 1 Marc-Andree Wolf & Kirana Chomkhamsri, The “Integrated formula” for modelling recycling, energy recovery and reuse in LCA - White paper – available at http://maki-consulting.com/?p=269

MAKI 2 Marc-Andree Wolf, Kirana Chomkhamsri, Fulvio Ardente: Modelling recycling, energy recovery and reuse in LCA, the 6th International Conference on Life Cycle Management in Gothenburg 2013

EN 15804, 2012 Sustainability of construction works — Environmental product declarations — Core rules for the product category of construction products, 2012

http://maki-consulting.com/?p=269

http://maki-consulting.com/?p=269

53

MURRAY, S., 1978 Glossary of terms applicable to wrought products in copper and copper alloys, International Wrought Copper Council, 1978

TILTON, LAGOS 2007

Tilton, J.E., and Lagos, G., 2007, Assessing the long-run availability of copper: Resources Policy, v. 32, p. 19-23

JOHNSON, HAMMARSTROM,ZIENTEK, DICKEN 2014

Johnson, K.M., Hammarstrom, J.M., Zientek, M.L., and Dicken, C.L., 2014, Estimate of undiscovered copper resources of the world, 2013: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2014–3004, 3 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/fs20143004

UNEP 2011 UNEP: Graedel et. al (2011) ”Estimating Long-Run Geological Stocks of Metals” UNEP International Panel on Sustainable Resource Management Working Group on Geological Stocks of Metals

JAMES, GALATOLA

2015 James, Keith; Galatola, Michele (2015), Screening and hotspot analysis: procedure to identify the hotspots and the most relevant contributions (in terms of impact categories, life cycle stages, processes and flows), Version 4.0, 24 April 2015

ICMM 2014 PE International (now thinkstep) on behalf of the following organizations: Aluminum Association Cobalt Development Institute, Eurometaux, Euromines, International Aluminium Institute, International Copper Association, International Council on Mining and Metals, International Lead Association, International Lead Management Center Site, International Lead Zinc Research Organization, International Manganese Institute, International Molybdenum Association, International Stainless Steel Forum, International Zinc Association, Nickel Institute, World Steel Association: Harmonization of LCA Methodologies for Metals, February 2014 / https://www.icmm.com/document/6657

https://www.icmm.com/document/6657

54

11 SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR THE PEFCR 764

Supporting information on the PEFCR are described in the screening study /SCREENING 2015/. 765

55

12 LIST OF ANNEXES 766

Annex I – Representative product 767

Annex II – Bill of Materials (BOM) 768

Annex III – Supporting studies 769

Annex IV – Metal production 770

Annex V – Benchmark and classes of environmental performance 771

Annex VI - Co-Products in metal production 772

Annex VII – Upstream scenarios (optional) 773

Annex VIII – Downstream scenarios (optional) 774

Annex IX – Normalisation factors 775

Annex X – Weighting factors 776

Annex XI – Foreground data 777

Annex XII – Background data 778

Annex XIII – EOL formulas 779

Annex XIV – Background information on methodological choices taken during the development of the 780 PEFCR 781

Annex XV – PCR References 782

Annex XVI – Hot spots 783

Annex XVII – Data quality Requirements 784

Annex XVIII – Screening Study 785

786

56

12.1 ANNEX I – REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCT AND EXISTING PRODUCT STANDARDS 787

A non-exhaustive list of relevant standards for the metals and their applications is shown below. 788

Product standards - Aluminium 789

Table 12-1: Examples of product standards for Aluminium 790

791

792

EN 1090-1:2009

Execution of steel structures and aluminium structures - Part 1:

Requirements for conformity assessment of structural

components Building High

EN 12258-1:2012Aluminium and aluminium alloys - Terms and definitions - Part

1: General terms alloys High

EN 12258-2:2004Aluminium and aluminium alloys - Terms and definitions - Part

2: Chemical analysisalloys High

EN 13859-1:2010

Flexible sheets for waterproofing - Definitions and

characteristics of underlays - Part 1: Underlays for

discontinuous roofing Building High

EN 13859-2:2010Flexible sheets for waterproofing - Definitions and

characteristics of underlays - Part 2: Underlays for wallsBuilding High

EN 1396:2007Aluminium and aluminium alloys - Coil coated sheet and strip

for general applications - Specifications Coil coated sheet High

EN 14509:2006Self-supporting double skin metal faced insulating panels -

Factory made products - SpecificationsBuilding High

EN 14782:2006Self-supporting metal sheet for roofing, external cladding and

internal lining - Product specification and requirements Building High

EN 14783:2006

Fully supported metal sheet and strip for roofing, external

cladding and internal lining - Product specification and

requirements Building High

EN507 : 1999Roofing products of metal sheet – Specification for fully

supported roofing product of aluminium sheet Building High

EN508-22008

Roofing products from metal sheet – specification for self-

supporting products of steel, aluminium or stainless steel sheet

– Part 2 : Aluminium Building High

EN 573-1:2004

Aluminium and aluminium alloys - Chemical composition and

form of wrought products - Part 1: Numerical designation

system Generic High

EN 573-2:1994


form of wrought products - Part 2: Chemical symbol based

designation system Generic High

EN 573-3:2013


form of wrought products - Part 3: Chemical composition and

form of products Generic High

EN 573-5:2007


form of wrought products - Part 5: Codification of standardized

wrought products Generic High

Standard reference Title Area Relevance

57

Product standards - Copper 793

Table 12-2: Examples of product standards for copper 794

795

796

EN 1172:2012-02 Copper and copper alloys - Sheet and strip for building purpose

Building

EN ISO 6507-1:2005Metallic materials - Vickers hardness test - Part 1: Test method

(ISO 6507-1:2005)

EN ISO 6507-2:2005Metallic materials - Vickers hardness test - Part 2: Verification

and calibration of testing machines (ISO 6507-2:2005)

EN ISO 6892-1:2009Metallic materials - Tensile testing - Part 1: Method of test at

room temperature (ISO 6892-1:2009)

EN 504:1999Roofing products from metal sheet - Specification for fully

supported roofing products from copper sheet

EN 506:2008Roofing products of metal sheet - Specification for self-

supporting products of copper or zinc sheet

EN 1172:2011 Copper and copper alloys - Sheet and strip for building purposes

EN 1462:2004 Brackets for eaves gutters - Requirements and testing

EN 1652:1997Copper and copper alloys - Plate, sheet, strip and circles for

general purposes

EN 14783:2013

Fully supported metal sheet and strip for roofing, external

cladding and internal lining - Product specification and

requirements

ISO 1811-2:1988-10

Copper and copper alloys; selection and preparation of samples

for chemical analysis; part 2: sampling of wrought products and

castings

EN 1976:2012 Copper and copper alloys - Cast unwrought copper products

DIN 17933-16:1997-07, Copper and copper alloys - Determination of residual stresses

in the Border area of slit strip

DIN 1402-1:1998-01Fire behaviour of building materials and building components -

Part 1: Building materials; concepts, requirements and tests

ISO 4739:1985-05Wrought copper and copper alloy products; Selection and

preparation of specimens and test pieces for mechanical testing

Standard reference Title Area

58

Product standards - Lead 797

For lead sheet used in roofing application, the standard BS EN 12588 2007-01-31/EN 12588:2006 798 applies. 799

Product standards - Steel 800

A non-exhaustive list of standards applicable for steel is provided below. 801

Table 12-3: Examples of products and standards for steel (Hot rolled products) 802

803

EN 10083-2 (2006) Steels for quenching and tempering - Part 2: Technical delivery

conditions for non alloy steels;

EN 10132-4 (2000)

Cold-rolled narrow steel strip for heat-treatment - Technical

delivery conditions - Part 4: Spring steels and other

applications;

EN 10149/2 (95)

Hot rolled flat products made of high yield strength steels for

cold forming - Part 2: Technical delivery conditions for

thermomechanically rolled steels;

EN 10083-3 (2006)Steels for quenching and tempering - Part 3: Technical delivery

conditions for alloy steels

ASTM A 568

Standard Specification for Steel, Sheet, Carbon, Structural, and

High-Strength, Low-Alloy, Hot-Rolled and Cold-Rolled, General

Requirements for

EN 10111 (2008)Continuously hot rolled low carbon steel sheet and strip for cold

forming - Technical delivery conditions

EN 10084 (2008) Case hardening steels - Technical delivery conditions

EN 10130 (after CR)Cold rolled low carbon steel flat products for cold forming -

Technical delivery conditions

EN 10120 (2008)Hot rolled products of structural steels - Part 2: Technical

delivery conditions for non-alloy structural steels

EN 10025/2 (2004)Hot rolled products of structural steels - Part 2: Technical


EN 10111 (2008)Continuously hot rolled low carbon steel sheet and strip for cold


API 5L (2007) Specification for Line Pipe

EN 10028-2 (2009)

Flat products made of steels for pressure purposes - Part 2:

Non-alloy and alloy steels with specified elevated temperature

properties

EN 10028-3 (2009)Flat products made of steels for pressure purposes - Part 3:

Weldable fine grain steels, normalized

EN 10028-5 (2009)Flat products made of steels for pressure purposes - Part 5:

Weldable fine grain steels, thermomechanically rolled

EN 10207 (2005)Steels for simple pressure vessels - Technical delivery

requirements for plates, strips and bars

EN 10111Continuously hot rolled low carbon steel sheet and strip for cold


EN 10025 (90)Hot rolled products of structural steels - Part 1: General

technical delivery conditions

EN 10025/2 (2004)Hot rolled products of structural steels - Part 2: Technical


Hot rolled products of structural steels - Part 5: Technical

delivery conditions for structural steels with improved

atmospheric corrosion resistance;

Hot rolled steel


EN 10025/5 (2004)

59

Table 12-4: Examples of products and standards for steel (Cold rolled, metallic/organic coated 804 products) 805

806

Table 12-5: Examples of products and standards for steel (Enamelling, electrical applications) 807

808

809

EN 10268 (2006)Cold rolled steel flat products with high yield strength for cold


EN 10130 (2006)Cold rolled low carbon steel flat products for cold forming -


ASTM A 568



Requirements for

ASTM A109Standard Specification for Steel, Strip, Carbon (0.25 Maximum

Percent), Cold-Rolled

EN 10268 (2006) Cold rolled steel flat products with high yield strength for cold

forming - Technical delivery conditions;

EN 10152 (2009)Electrolytically zinc coated cold rolled steel flat products for

cold forming - Technical delivery conditions

EN 10346 (2009)Continuously hot-dip coated steel flat products - Technical

delivery conditions

NFA 36-345 Iron and steel. Aluminium coated sheet. Cut lengths and coils

SEW 022 (2010)Continuously hot-dip coated steel flat products - Zinc-

magnesium coatings - Technical delivery conditions

EN 10169 (2010)Continuously organic coated (coil coated) steel flat products -

Technical delivery conditionsOrganic coated steel

Cold rolled steel

Metallic coated steel


EN 10209 (96)Cold rolled low carbon steel flat products for vitreous enamelling -

Technical delivery conditionsSteel for enamelling

EN 10265 (95)Magnetic materials - Specification for steel sheet and strip with

specified mechanical properties and magnetic permeability

EN 10303 (2006)

Industrial automation systems and integration - Product data

representation and exchange - Part 112: Integrated application

resource: Modelling commands for the exchange of procedurally

represented 2D CAD models

EN 10106 (2007)Cold rolled non-oriented electrical steel sheet and strip delivered

in the fully processed state

EN 10107 (2005)Grain-oriented electrical steel sheet and strip delivered in the

fully processed state

EN 10265 (95)Magnetic materials - Specification for steel sheet and strip with

specified mechanical properties and magnetic permeability

EN 10341 (2006)Cold rolled electrical non-alloy and alloy steel sheet and strip

delivered in the semi-processed state

Steels for electrical applications


60

Table 12-6 specifies the thickness of a metal sheet for a typical end application, but this should be 810 considered only as a representative example, and thus a precise benchmark for thickness (defining 811 ‘how much’) is not possible in this PEFCR. Final accurate parameters will have to be fixed by end-use 812 PEFCRs in order to allow meaningful comparisons and benchmarking. In this chapter illustrative 813 representative products for the following areas of application are defined based on the screening 814 study /SCREENING 2015/: 815

1. Building 816

2. Appliances 817

818

Six representative products are defined: 819

Four for the subcategory “building applications”: 820

- one for copper roofing, 821

- one for lead roofing, 822

- one for aluminium roofing and 823

- one for steel flooring 824

and two for the subcategory “appliances”: aluminium and steel body sheets. Table 12-6 shows the 5 825 main categories (and others) of applications based on market share for the metal sheets considered. 826

Table 12-6: Overview on market share, conversion factors and average thicknesses 827

Yearly market in ktonnes

Construction Transport Appliances Packaging Engineering Others

Lead 90 0 0 0 0 10

Aluminium 610 875 193 2.328 480 0

Steel 18.7944 21.092 3.672 3.456 20.546 15.343

Copper 76 not considered not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

Range and (Example)

thickness (mm)


Lead 1,7 not considered not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

Aluminium 0,5 1,1 1 0,1 1 -

Steel 0.4-10

(1)

0.4-5

(1)

0.2-3.5

(0.6)

0.2-2

(0.2)

1-10

(1)

1-10

(1)

Copper 0,6 not considered not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

Conversion factor (m² / tonnes)


Lead 52 not considered not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

Aluminium 741 337 185 3704 370 0

Steel 128 128 128 641 128 128


not considered

not considered

not considered

Yearly market in millions m2


4 only contains the tonnages of flat products, not long product

61

Lead 5 not considered not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

Aluminium 452 295 36 8.622 178 0

Steel 2.409 2.704 471 2.215 2.634 1.967


not considered

not considered

not considered

Market share (based on market

in m2)


Lead 0,2% not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

Aluminium 15,7% 9,8% 7,1% 79,6% 6,3%

Steel 83,7% 90,2% 92,9% 20,4% 93,7% 100,0%

Copper 0,5% not considered not considered

not considered

not considered

not considered

828

Table 12-7 shows typical values for the main important product properties, which are also relevant 829 foreground data. Specifically for R1 and R2 there are more than two combinations of (scrap) recycling 830 possible. The example with i=2 is an appropriate way to reflect the representative product and need 831 to be adapted (e.g. expanded) in case of a PEF application. 832

Table 12-7: Product properties for representative products 833

Parameter Unit Steel,

Building Steel,

Appliances Aluminium,

Building Aluminium, Appliances

Copper Lead

Thickness mm 1 0,60 0,70 1,00 0,60 1,70

Grammage Kg/m² 7,8 4,68 1,90 2,71 5,30 19,20

R1 0,54 0,54 0,40 0,40 0,65 1

Share of Erecycled,1

(= R1,1;tech. description)

% 100 (0,54; sec.

billet)

100 (0,54; sec. billet)

100 (0,40; sec. slab)

100 (0,40; sec. slab)

30 (0,195;

sec. cathode)

80 (0,8; battery recycling)



% 0 0 0 0 70 (0,455; clean scrap)

20 (0,2; clean lead scrap recycling)

R2 0,95 0,90 0,95 0,90 0,90 0,95

Share of ErecycledEoL,1


% 100 (0,95; clean scrap)

100 (0,90; clean scrap)







% 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)

Share of EV % 46 46 60 60 35 0

na= not applicable 834

62

Note: The values for R1 represent sector average figures. In the PEF studies the actual rate for the 835 metal sheet produced shall be taken into account.5 836

837

5 The values for R1 represent sector average figures. In the PEF studies the actual rate for the metal sheet produced

should be preferably taken into account. Similarly, R2 values (R2=0,9-0,95) represents first estimate of end of life

recycling rates. If available, more specific values should be used in PEF studies

63

Disclaimer of the Technical Secretariat: 838

The following figures are purely indicative and shall not be used for benchmarking purposes at intermediate product level since the precise characteristics 839 of the metal sheet (e.g. thickness) and its performances during the use phase shall be considered to obtain a relevant comparison. 840

Table 12-8: LCA results for representative products (Annex V) 841

impact categories Unit Steel

Building

Steel

appliances

Aluminium

building

Aluminium

appliances Copper Lead

Cradle to gate

EoL6 Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate

EoL

Acidification [Mole of H+ eq.]

2,85E-02 -5,81E-03 1,71E-02 -3,28E-03 8,16E-02 -4,45E-02 1,16E-01 -6,01E-02 9,84E-02 -5,95E-02 1,43E-01 -6,49E-02

Freshwater eutrophication

[kg P eq] 4,41E-06 1,18E-06 2,65E-06 7,35E-07 5,35E-06 -2,50E-06 7,63E-06 -3,35E-06 1,72E-05 -7,58E-06 2,65E-05 -1,66E-05

Global warming. excl biogenic carbon

[kg CO2-Equiv.]

1,50E+01 -6,78E+00 8,98E+00 -3,85E+00 1,38E+01 -6,98E+00 1,96E+01 -9,43E+00 1,51E+01 -8,15E+00 2,54E+01 -1,08E+01

Global warming. incl biogenic carbon

[kg CO2-Equiv.]

1,49E+01 -6,77E+00 8,95E+00 -3,84E+00 1,38E+01 -6,99E+00 1,96E+01 -9,44E+00 1,47E+01 -7,95E+00 2,52E+01 -1,06E+01

Ionising radiation [kBq U235 eq]

2,27E-01 1,79E-01 1,36E-01 1,02E-01 8,91E-01 -4,44E-01 1,27E+00 -6,00E-01 5,33E-01 -2,23E-01 8,32E-01 -3,36E-01

Land use. Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

[kg C deficit eq]

1,09E+00 0,00E+00 6,54E-01 0,00E+00 9,37E-03 0,00E+00 1,33E-02 0,00E+00 3,90E-02 0,00E+00 4,55E-02 0,00E+00

Marine eutrophication [kg N-Equiv.]

6,78E-04 -1,66E-04 4,07E-04 -9,30E-05 1,23E-03 -6,33E-04 1,75E-03 -8,54E-04 2,20E-03 -1,28E-03 4,10E-03 -2,65E-03

6 Additional environmental information

64


Building

Steel

appliances

Aluminium

building

Aluminium


Ozone depletion [kg CFC-11 eq]

-3,42E-08 2,57E-08 -2,05E-08 1,46E-08 4,34E-09 -2,27E-09 6,19E-09 -3,06E-09 6,11E-10 -2,70E-11 1,37E-09 -1,41E-10

Particulate matter [kg PM2.5-Equiv.]

1,98E-03 -1,97E-04 1,19E-03 -8,13E-05 8,53E-03 -4,70E-03 1,22E-02 -6,33E-03 7,70E-03 -3,09E-03 6,74E-03 -3,01E-03

Photochemical ozone formation

[kg NMVOC]

2,94E-02 -1,09E-02 1,76E-02 -6,16E-03 3,35E-02 -1,74E-02 4,77E-02 -2,35E-02 4,03E-02 -2,39E-02 8,48E-02 -5,42E-02

Terrestrial eutrophication

[Mole of N eq.]

7,99E-02 -2,69E-02 4,79E-02 -1,52E-02 1,16E-01 -6,08E-02 1,66E-01 -8,21E-02 1,65E-01 -9,93E-02 3,32E-01 -2,21E-01

Total freshwater consumption

[kg] 1,33E+00 1,04E+00 7,99E-01 5,95E-01 1,99E+01 -1,13E+01 2,84E+01 -1,52E+01 2,15E+01 -1,19E+01 1,84E+01 -1,36E+01

Impact categories considered as non-robust

Ecotoxicity for aquatic fresh water

[CTUe] 1,18E+00 -3,73E-02 7,07E-01 -2,06E-02 5,16E-01 -2,80E-01 7,36E-01 -3,78E-01 3,31E+00 -1,91E+00 2,15E+00 -1,09E+00

Human toxicity cancer effects

[CTUh] 5,20E-09 -1,35E-09 3,12E-09 -7,44E-10 7,22E-09 -3,99E-09 1,03E-08 -5,37E-09 1,49E-08 -9,02E-09 1,26E-07 -9,89E-08

Human toxicity non-canc. Effects


Resource Depletion. fossil and mineral. reserve Based. CML2002

[kg Sb-Equiv.]

9,56E-05 -2,73E-05 5,73E-05 -1,55E-05 2,00E-04 -1,18E-04 2,86E-04 -1,59E-04 2,38E-05 -1,51E-05 1,05E-03 -8,90E-04

842

65

Table 12-9: LCA results for representative products (Modular Integrated Equation) 843


building

Steel

appliances

Aluminium

building

Aluminium


Cradle to gate

EoL7 Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate EoL Cradle to gate

EoL Cradle to gate

EoL

Acidification [Mole of H+ eq.]

2,49E-02 -5,36E-03 1,49E-02 -2,79E-03 6,28E-02 -5,16E-02 8,95E-02 -6,69E-02 5,86E-02 -4,02E-02 1,31E-01 -1,05E-01

Freshwater eutrophication

[kg P eq] 5,03E-06 2,09E-07 3,02E-06 1,78E-07 4,28E-06 -3,17E-06 6,11E-06 -4,08E-06 1,18E-05 -4,86E-06 1,16E-05 -3,36E-06

Global warming. excl biogenic carbon

[kg CO2-Equiv.]

1,08E+01 -5,90E+00 6,50E+00 -3,10E+00 1,08E+01 -8,09E+00 1,54E+01 -1,05E+01 9,71E+00 -5,59E+00 2,32E+01 -1,73E+01

Global warming. incl biogenic carbon

[kg CO2-Equiv.]

1,08E+01 -5,88E+00 6,48E+00 -3,10E+00 1,08E+01 -8,11E+00 1,54E+01 -1,05E+01 9,46E+00 -5,48E+00 2,33E+01 -1,75E+01

Ionising radiation [kBq U235 eq]

3,36E-01 1,54E-01 2,02E-01 8,10E-02 7,03E-01 -5,14E-01 1,00E+00 -6,67E-01 3,97E-01 -1,74E-01 7,17E-01 -4,41E-01

Land use. Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

[kg C deficit eq]

1,09E+00 0,00E+00 6,54E-01 0,00E+00 9,37E-03 0,00E+00 1,33E-02 0,00E+00 3,90E-02 0,00E+00 4,55E-02 0,00E+00

Marine eutrophication [kg N-Equiv.]

5,76E-04 -1,57E-04 3,45E-04 -8,16E-05 9,62E-04 -7,37E-04 1,37E-03 -9,55E-04 1,31E-03 -7,99E-04 1,94E-03 -9,98E-04

Ozone depletion [kg CFC-11 eq]

-1,86E-08 2,22E-08 -1,12E-08 1,17E-08 3,39E-09 -2,63E-09 4,83E-09 -3,40E-09 7,01E-10 -2,26E-10 2,09E-09 -1,71E-09

7 Additional environmental information

66


building

Steel

appliances

Aluminium

building

Aluminium


Particulate matter [kg PM2.5-Equiv.]

1,81E-03 -5,60E-04 1,09E-03 -2,62E-04 6,54E-03 -5,57E-03 9,33E-03 -7,20E-03 7,85E-03 -6,54E-03 5,92E-03 -4,38E-03

Photochemical ozone formation

[kg NMVOC]

2,28E-02 -9,66E-03 1,37E-02 -5,07E-03 2,61E-02 -2,02E-02 3,72E-02 -2,62E-02 2,38E-02 -1,53E-02 4,29E-02 -2,46E-02

Terrestrial eutrophication

[Mole of N eq.]

6,34E-02 -2,43E-02 3,80E-02 -1,27E-02 9,07E-02 -7,08E-02 1,29E-01 -9,17E-02 9,56E-02 -6,19E-02 1,50E-01 -7,64E-02

Total freshwater consumption

[kg] 1,96E+00 8,69E-01 1,18E+00 4,61E-01 1,52E+01 -1,31E+01 2,16E+01 -1,70E+01 1,30E+01 -6,88E+00 5,95E+00 -2,24E+00

Impact categories considered as non-robust

Ecotoxicity for aquatic fresh water

[CTUe] 1,15E+00 -3,95E-02 6,93E-01 -2,02E-02 3,98E-01 -3,27E-01 5,67E-01 -4,23E-01 2,05E+00 -1,32E+00 1,40E+00 -6,73E-01

Human toxicity cancer effects


Human toxicity non-canc. Effects


Resource Depletion. fossil and mineral. reserve Based. CML2002

[kg Sb-Equiv.]

7,90E-05 -2,36E-05 4,74E-05 -1,24E-05 1,50E-04 -1,37E-04 2,15E-04 -1,77E-04 1,30E-05 -8,67E-06 1,36E-04 4,13E-05

844

67

12.2 ANNEX II – BILL OF MATERIALS (BOM)

Table 12-10: Representative Product(s) specification

Representative Products (N.)

Parameter Unit 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Metal Steel Steel Aluminium Aluminium Copper Lead

Composition See Figure 12-2, Table 12-11

See Figure 12-2, Table 12-11

See Figure 12-1

See Figure 12-1

99%Cu 99%Pb

Thickness mm 1 0,60 0,70 1,00 0,60 1,70

Grammage Kg/m² 7,8 4,68 1,90 2,71 5,30 19,20

R1 0,54 0,54 0,40 0,40 0,65 1



% 100 (0,54; sec. billet)

100 (0,54; sec. billet)

100 (0,40; sec. slab)

100 (0,40; sec. slab)

30 (0,195; sec. cathode)

80 (0,8; battery recycling)



% 0 0 0 0 70 (0,455; clean scrap)

20 (0,2; clean lead scrap recycling)

R2 0,95 0,90 0,95 0,90 0,90 0,95



% 100 (0,95; clean scrap)








% 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)

Share of EV % 46 46 60 60 35 0

The metal sheets PEF pilot will take all the raw materials and operating materials into account as required in the production steps explained in the system boundaries section. Certain additional alloying-elements can be added to give the required properties. The Bill of Materials for the six representative products will be described below per subcategory:

While copper (Cu 99%) and lead (Pb 99%) sheets are composed almost exclusively from pure metal, aluminium and steel may also include alloying elements and/or coatings (metallic or non-metallic) depending on the type of applications.

The main alloys for Aluminium, from the perspective of the chosen application for testing have been specified by the European Aluminium Association and are listed below:

68

Figure 12-1: Main aluminium alloys used in the building and appliances sector

As mentioned above, the alloy compositions of the metals sheets varies according to the final application. In the model for this screening study, several typical alloys were included in order to allow the user to choose different alloy compositions depending on the chosen case for study. The list of alloys is not exhaustive but sufficiently large for illustration purposes during the pilot project.

Steel in general has a very low alloying content (< 2%) to create the different mechanical properties. Hence, one can mix all grades together in the recycling phase. Exceptions to this rule exist but involve relatively small volumes (e.g. stainless steel - a specific family with separate recycling collection).

The Figure 12-2 shows examples for the chemical composition of alloys used in white good appliances.

Figure 12-2: Example from deep drawing sheet quality (e.g. in white good appliances)

Additionally, the table below lists the allowable content of each alloying element in carbon steels (steels for construction) according to EN 10346. The chemical composition of carbon steel (steels for construction) is defined by varying the ratio of these alloying elements, subject to the upper-limit specified below.

Main Alloys used

Sheet for building applications 3003, 3004, 5005, 5182 and 5754

Sheet for Appliances : 5005A & 5754

Alloy Mg Mn Fe Si Si+Fe Cu Zn CrOther

Elem

Total

OtherAl

Building 3003 - 1.0-1.5 ≤0.7 ≤0.6 - 0.05-0.20 ≤0.10 - ≤0.05 ≤0.15 Rem.

Building 3004 0.8-1.3 1.0-1.5 ≤0.7 ≤0.30 - ≤0.25 ≤0.25 - ≤0.05 ≤0.15 Rem.

Building 5005 0.50-1.1 ≤0.20 ≤0.7 ≤0.30 - ≤0.20 ≤0.25 ≤0.10 ≤0.05 ≤0.15 Rem.

Appliances 5005A 0.7-1.1 ≤0.15 ≤0.45 ≤0.30 - ≤0.05 ≤0.20 ≤0.10 ≤0.05 ≤0.15 Rem.

Building 5182 4.0-5.0 0.20-0.50 ≤0.35 ≤0.20 - ≤0.15 ≤0.25 ≤0.10 ≤0.05 ≤0.15 Rem.

Building & Applinaces 5754 2.6-3.6 ≤0.50 ≤0.40 ≤0.40 - ≤0.10 ≤0.20 ≤0.30 ≤0.05 ≤0.15 Rem.

69

Table 12-11: Example: Content of alloys according to EN 10346

Element Chemical composition % by mass max.

C 0.20

Mn 1.70

P 0.10

S 0.045

Si 0.60

Fe 97.36

For aluminium a sensitivity analysis has been performed on alloying elements. This analysis shows that, when considering the default EF impact categories (after weighting and normalization), potential environmental hotspots can be reasonably expected to occur within primary aluminium production and not within the production of the alloying elements. This finding supports a focus on aluminium itself, rather than considering differences between the many different aluminium alloys.

For steel an analysis of the sensitivity of screening results to the inclusion of alloying elements was performed. This analysis shows that, when considering the default EF impact categories (after weighting and normalisation), potential environmental hotspots can be reasonably expected to occur within primary metal production and not within the alloying elements. This finding supports a focus on steel itself, rather than considering differences between the low alloyed steel types typically applied in the construction sector.

For the purposes of calculating an emission profile, alloying or coating elements should be included, unless they represent less than 1%.

70

12.3 ANNEX III – SUPPORTING STUDIES

In addition to the PEFCR screening study of the average representative products, there are four company performed supporting studies. These are:

Coiled Hot-dip galvanized (HDG) steel sheet from ArcelorMittal

Hot Dipped Galvanised Steel for Construction from Tata Steel

NORDIC STANDARD™ Copper sheet from Aurubis

Roofing copper sheet from KME

71

Product Environment Footprint (PEF)

Supporting study for metal sheet (Galvanized steel sheet) from ArcelorMittal

Summary report

Version: June 2016 – V1.1

This report provides the outcomes of the PEF supporting study for Coiled Hot-dip galvanized (HDG) steel sheet produced by ArcelorMittal. The results and conclusions of this report shall be used for no other purpose than the development of the PEF Category Rules.

1. General Information

Description of intermediate product

Name of the product

Coiled Hot-dip galvanized (HDG) steel sheet in scope of data collected is applied in automotive, construction, appliance, packaging and/or other sectors (distribution in graph below)

Product classification (CPA) C24.10.5

39%

22%

2%

8%

10%

3%

16%

AM steel sheet applications in 2014

Automotive

Interworks

Appliances & General Industry

Metal Processing

Construction

Primary Transformation

Distribution

72

Company name ArcelorMittal is global steel and mining company. Scope of this study is HDG steel sheet produced by AM EU based integrated steel mill

Date of publication 13 May 2016

Geographic validity Western Europe + global export

Reference PEFCR “Draft PEFCR for Metal Sheets for various applications”, revision 0.9 from 9th February 2016.

Critical review No critical review has been undertaken

2. Summary: goal, scope, main results

Additional to the common goal of testing the draft PEFCR and validating the outcomes of the screening study, ArcelorMittal is motivated to assess the level of uncertainty on the results of the PEF supporting study, in particular the applicable confidence ranges on the environmental profile. The latter are often omitted in communication of results and may lead to unjustified conclusions in case of benchmarking.

Communication of study results was aimed at process and technology experts within the company to build their operational experience in verifying robustness of outcomes.

Data collection

Special effort and attention went to process of data collection in order to assess the accuracy of the data made available and to calculate the effect of ‘uncertainty propagation’. Inaccuracies that may have remained unidentified were identified in collection process, contributing to bias in final results.

A reference for verification was made by ArcelorMittal by linking its PEF study with the contribution to worldsteel association (WSA) LCI update. The data pool of WSA proved that data at association level offer a major quality advantage over individual studies as the former have built in peer cross-checking by experts of competing producers in the sector.

Regarding the quality of data, despite some important processes that drive the environmental profile of the steel sheet do not meet the Data Quality Rating, the overall Data Quality Rating (DQR) still reaches a median value of 1.6, a level considered as a very good DQR. The materiality principle may not be well reflected by simple averaging of the data Quality Factor of each processes. A weighting factor that gives more weight to the most relevant processes is suggested.

During the quality rating of processes, it has been identified that the Data Quality Rating may overlook representativeness issues: for example how will regional data be rated if only an insignificant fraction of local producers have provided data? (e.g. while producing half of world steel output, only one company in China provides data in worldsteel LCI).

A methodology for estimating uncertainty is proposed by adapting the ecoinvent Pedigree matrix with PEF Data Quality Rating to provide systematically confidence ranges for each of the different environmental impact categories. The ArcelorMittal study suggests that with such approach the contribution to uncertainty of results by data collected on site may somewhat overrated while that the contribution of secondary data sets is underrated.

73

Modelling

In context of testing the draft PEFCR rules and considering complexity of current worldsteel process model, a Vito model was developed for making various sensitivity analyses. The results shows that that despite a common framework of PEFCR, the complexity of real operations and their modelling still adds to the variation/bias up to the point of making direct comparison invalid (e.g. between supporting and screening study results).

The use of a common process model by sector would benefit the above issue however the worldsteel process model has evolved into such a complex tool that that in practice access/application is limited to a handful of experts.

ArcelorMittal recommends the use of subdivision as alternative to system expansion to decouple of steel product system from other systems linked to the use of its co-products (e.g. slags applied as fertiliser, clinker substitute in cement, process gases as input for power production…) and report the real environmental rather than allocation driven impacts. If allocation method would be applied, a consistent approach (e.g. 50/50) for all co-products is recommended.

Impact assessment methods, normalisation and weighting

In addition to uncertainty linked to data and modelling, the robustness of impact assessment methods and Life Cycle Assessment models shall be considered in reporting of the environmental profile.

This supporting study has found that normalisation and weighting factors do not point to environmental impacts traditionally associated with steel making but to concerns considered as secondary (e.g. abiotic resources depletion indicator popping up due the use of zinc for the galvanising process).

Reference screening study

Results of ArcelorMittal study confirm climate change, acidification and photochemical ozone formation as most relevant impact categories.

Benchmarking with the environmental profile of the steel sheet in the screening phase proved to be invalid due to different system boundaries/scope in product upstream:

To conform with approach of some other metals in PEF pilot that refer to ‘material pool’ rather than ‘product pool’, the upstream scope of screening is based on average EU slab, a scope that additionally includes steel products different from sheet within the system boundaries. The specific technical requirements of these products make that higher levels of ferrous scrap (R1) are typically used as input material then technically possible for sheet applications;

The non-alignment of system boundaries has also repercussions on technical representativeness: it mixes the different functionality (‘melting’ versus ‘smelt reduction’) of 2 dominant steel process technologies: electric arc furnace using metallic ferrous input to prepare the steel melt while the smelt-reducing process of integrated BF/BOF process embeds the additional reduction of a mineral into metal while liquefying it together with a limited amount of added scrap. Metal sheet products are typically made over the latter process route.

Hence for consistency of system boundaries, ArcelorMittal also recommends an approach of vertical over horizontal averaging that includes only those process/input-output combinations that are technically feasible for the product in scope. Further the use of the integrated equation is

74

recommended to calculate the environmental footprint of metal products while it fully accounts for the reduction into metallic iron – directly or as an upstream impact - whatever process route is applicable to the steel product considered.

3. Feedback on draft PEFCR used

With a focus of the ArcelorMittal study on various constituents of variability or bias in final results, we make following recommendations to further develop draft PEFCR for ‘Metal sheets’

Scope: the PEF profile shall report in its scope the product mix be that corresponds to the system boundary of the data collected e.g. if granularity is one site, all products made by that site.

Modelling: Consistent modelling for production process within and between metal commodities is recommended. This includes guidance on:

o System boundaries: vertical average vs horizontal averaging to avoid ‘upstream system expansion’ that includes processes and input/outputs of products not in scope (effect on R1);

o Internal allocations e.g. co-products; o Point of substitution in relation to quality of secondary inputs; o A fair trade-off between complexity/accessibility in recommended commodity

process models:

On all aspects of alloying, the PEFCR shall be less ‘concise’ and make recommendations on: o Product mix effects and alloy ranges of product included/excluded from scope; o Include reference data sets for alloying elements; o Modelling of end-of-life recycling of alloying elements under the concept of a scrap

pool;

Packaging chapter resulted in relatively complex calculations for minimal overall contribution. Add sentence in PEFCR to highlight packaging typically is minimal for intermediate metals products;

Data: Considering the significant effect the selection of data has on final results: o Further guidance on how to make DQR assessment shall become part of overall PEF

Guidance to assure a more objective assessment. Further, an overall DQR score based on equal rather than weighted contribution for each data set does not penalise significant bias that can be induced by selection of non-representative data sets on hot spot contributors. This study recommends PEF to further develop the method it has applied for estimating of uncertainty range of each of reported impact indicators due to data selected/collected. We suggested making uncertainty assessment a ‘default requirement’ on each impact of profile report. This level of uncertainty shall be fully integrated in the communication format (e.g. tables or graphs) of the environmental impact results.

o On collected data is suggested missing data on accounted emissions are not replaced by collection average but a 75th percentile data (typically more realistic);

o The experience from our study encountered important gaps in quality of data sets that represent the raw material supply chain of steel making process: primary minerals (iron ore, coal, alloying elements, ..) and secondary input, i.e. scrap preparation (collection, shredding, sorting);

75

Product Environmental Footprint

Supporting Study

Construction Hot Dipped Galvanised Steel

1 Summary

This supporting study is part of the PEF Metal sheets pilot and is intended to support the development of the PEFR for Metal Sheets. The current study aims to be compliant with the Guidance Document version 5.2 and the draft PEFCR version 0.9. It should not used to be compared to other results outside the scope and boundary of this particular study.

2 General

Hot Dipped Galvanised Steel for Construction

• Tata Steel (Europe) • 31st March 2016 • Global Market • PEFCR for Metal Sheets for various applications – Revision 0.9 • Not Critically Reviewed

3 Goal of the study

This supporting study is part of the PEF Metal sheets pilot and is intended to support the development of the PEFR for Metal Sheets. It should not used to be compared to other results outside the scope and boundary of this particular study.

76

4 Scope of the study

4.1 Functional/declared unit and reference flow

The functions/services provided: the “what”

The function includes a non-exhaustive list e.g. structural integrity, weather protection, physical separation, shaping, sealing, aesthetics, etc.

The extent of the function expressed in the reference flow is defined as 1 m². This reference flow was selected because it adequately quantifies the most relevant applications of the metal sheet. The density of the steel is set at 7.8kg/m2

Technical product properties are specified by product standards (or technical approvals). Therefore the quality of the representative products shall be described by test standards, i.e. the most relevant, international, regional, national or technical standards.

4.2 System boundaries

The system boundaries are ‘cradle to steel rolling/finishing process’ gate including all the environmentally relevant upstream processes and core processes. As this is an intermediate product there is no use stage included. End of Life stage is included (as supplementary information)

EN 10268 (2006)Cold rolled steel flat products with high yield strength for cold


EN 10130 (2006)Cold rolled low carbon steel flat products for cold forming -


ASTM A 568



Requirements for

ASTM A109Standard Specification for Steel, Strip, Carbon (0.25 Maximum

Percent), Cold-Rolled

EN 10268 (2006) Cold rolled steel flat products with high yield strength for cold

forming - Technical delivery conditions;

EN 10152 (2009)Electrolytically zinc coated cold rolled steel flat products for

cold forming - Technical delivery conditions

EN 10346 (2009)Continuously hot-dip coated steel flat products - Technical

delivery conditions

NFA 36-345 Iron and steel. Aluminium coated sheet. Cut lengths and coils

SEW 022 (2010)Continuously hot-dip coated steel flat products - Zinc-

magnesium coatings - Technical delivery conditions

EN 10169 (2010)Continuously organic coated (coil coated) steel flat products -

Technical delivery conditionsOrganic coated steel

Cold rolled steel

Metallic coated steel


77

4.3 Supplementary analysis

Supplementary analysis looking various EOL methodologies as required by the PEFCR beyond that of the default recycling equation in the PEF guidance.

5 Data Gaps

Data on land use and capital goods were not available and not included at this current stage. Regionalized data on water, AP and EP contributing emissions were also not available at this stage.

6 PEF Results

The PEFCR does not include a benchmark, due to the product being an intermediate product, so the characterised results of the representative steel product from the screen study was used as a benchmark. Comparing the results of the screen study with ones of the supporting study it is possible to verify if the same life cycle stages, processes and elementary flows are identified as relevant. Analysis showed that the most relevant life cycle stage is the manufacturing stage which included the raw material extraction, slab product and rolling impacts. For the supporting study the data was broken down into these stages to see which process within the life cycle stage was also relevant.

78

Comparing the processes of the screen study and the supporting study, the impact assessments where there was comparability were:

Acidification

Ecotoxicity Freshwater

Eutrophication Freshwater

Human Toxicity Cancer effects

Human Toxicity Non Cancer Effects

GWP

Eutrophication Marine

Ozone Depletion

Particulate Matter


Eutrophication Terrestrial

Resource Depletion

Comparing relevant elementary flows of the screening study and the supporting study, the impact assessments where there was comparability were:

Acidification

Eutrophication Freshwater

Human Toxicity Cancer effects

Human Toxicity Non Cancer Effects

Ionising Radiation

GWP

Eutrophication Marine

Ozone Depletion

Particulate Matter


Eutrophication Terrestrial

Total Fresh Water

Differing Process and elementary flow impacts can be attributed to a couple of main factors.

Upstream models were updated in-between studies.

Technological coverage between the two studies meant that some processes and relevant flows were captured in the screening study that were not relevant to the supporting study.

6.2 Supplementary analysis

Supplementary analysis of the EOL formulae as defined in the Guidance document with others proposed in the PEFCR demonstrated that for the robust impact assessments, there a significant difference of results compared to the default equation, depending on what EOL formulae was selected.

79

Aurubis Finland Oy,

Pori, Finland

Non-Confidential Summary – PEF Supporting Study Copper sheet

80

The Aurubis Finland production site is located in Western Finland in Pori on the Kokemäenjoki River. The copper foundry and rolling mill are in a copper industrial park where other companies working with copper are located. The area of the site is about 78,000 m² and 200 employees work there. The foundry includes a shaft melting furnace, casting induction furnace and a continuous caster for billets and cakes. The foundry is followed by hot and cold rolling steps. The rolling mill in Pori is a state-of-the-art hot and cold rolling mill, and it is fully integrated from casting to finishing. The site produces a wide range of rolled products - strips, sheets, plates from copper and copper alloys. In 2014 the site produced 28,111 t of strip, sheet, plate and circles as well as 46,906 t of shapes, some of which were for internal use. Copper scrap is used first and foremost for production; recycling materials account for around 75 % of the raw materials used in the foundry. The copper DHP sheets for architectural applications are produced in three surface qualities: plain copper (Nordic Standard), industrially pre-oxidized copper (Nordic Brown) and patina coated on one side (Nordic Green). Furthermore copper alloy sheets are also produced, Nordic Bronze as well as Nordic Brass and Nordic Royal sheets

The waste heat that arises in the foundry is sold to the local power plant Pori Energia. The waste heat produced during the hot rolling process is reused to preheat combustion air during processing. Emissions of dust and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are reduced to a minimum using afterburning and filters. Cooling water in the smelting process circulates in a closed system. Cooling water and some process water from the rolling mill are treated; copper and oil residues are separated. In the past three years, more than € 660,000 has been invested in measures that improve environmental performance.

General information

81

The PEF supporting study was performed according to the requirements of the PEFCR on metals sheets (version 0.9), the PEF Guide (Annex III to Recommendation (2013/179/EU)) and the Product Environmental Footprint Pilot Guidance (version 5.2).

The purpose of this study was

To test the draft PEFCR

To validate the outcomes of the screening study, e.g. selection of relevant impact categories,

life cycle stages, processes

To test different EoL formulas

To provide results that can be used as a basis for communicating the PEF profile

To support environmental management, identification of environmental hotspots, and environmental improvement and performance tracking

The scope of the study refers to copper sheet for architectural applications using phosphorus deoxidized copper, designated Cu-DHP and complying with EN 1172:2011 – “Copper and Copper Alloys: Sheet and Strip for Building Purposes” . The selected copper sheet for the study is NORDIC STANDARD™, manufactured at Aurubis Finland Oy in Pori, which is mill finish copper without any additional surface treatments carried out in the factory

The copper sheet (NORDIC STANDARD™) is used for architectural applications: building and construction industry, facades, roofs, integrated roof systems.

The reference flow 1 m² of copper sheet with a thickness of 0,6mm and weight 3,5km.

The system boundary included all life cycle stages from cradle-to-gate and information on recyclability potential at end of life was provided as mandatory additional environmental information.

The following life cycle stages were included in the study:

- Raw material acquisition and pre-processing (Cathode & Scrap)

- Production of the main product (Melting & Rolling)

- End of Life considered as part of the mandatory additional environmental information

For the purpose of the hot spot analysis, the following processes were included:

- Mining & Concentration

- Smelting & Refining

- Secondary Material Production

- Melting & Rolling

Data quality requirements identified in the PEFCR were met. Primary data were collected for the core processes melting and rolling, while secondary data were used to model the upstream processes. Primary activity data were used for input of recycled materials (R1) and transport of raw materials.

Executive Summary

82

Resource Depletion mineral, fossil is by far the most relevant impact category, due also to the known limitations of the current recommended characterization model. When excluding Resource depletion, fossil mineral, the most relevant impact categories are the same ones identified in the screening study, apart from ionising radiation which in the supporting study has a higher contribution.

The most relevant life cycle stage for all impact categories is “Raw Materials & Pre-Processing (Cathode & Scrap)”. “Production of main product (Melting & Rolling)” is relevant for 3 robust impact categories, Ozone depletion, Climate change, and Eutrophication freshwater.

The most relevant process is “Mining & Concentration” which appears as hotspot in all impact categories, followed by “Smelting & Refining” and “Melting & Rolling”.

The data quality rating for the supporting is 1.83.

As supplementary analyses, testing of EoL formulas was performed: Annex V (baseline); Module D; Integrated formulas. The testing of the different EoL formulas demonstrated further that the application of formula has high impact on the results. The testing of EoL formula confirmed the importance to identify a formula that gives consistent results for “cradle to gate” and “cradle to grave” scenario and recognizes efforts made by an organisation to recycle scrap as well as the recyclability at the end-of-life.

In compassion with the screening study , the results for the supporting study for the baseline scenario (Annex V ) tend to be lower . The main reason is due to the higher amount of secondary material (clean scrap) used in the copper product.

Important uncertainties were identified with the results related to: (1) the need to differentiate between “pure” primary copper cathode data set and “pure” secondary copper cathode profile/data set, (2) the characterization models used to assess some impact categories such as Toxicity-related categories, Land use and Resource depletion, water as well as the ADP method, therefore all of these impact categories need to be interpreted with great care; (3) Uncertainty of selected datasets, (4) interpretation and application of the EoL formulas, (5) asymmetry between data for site activities and upstream activities.

The following recommendations for improvement of the PEFCR are suggested:

Improve the section in the PEFCR on grouping of life cycle stages and processes

Require performing hot spot analysis separately for mining & concentration, smelting &

refining and melting & rolling

Improve consistency for calculation of results with EoL formulas - include practical example

for calculation of Ev, Ev*, Ev §

Improve the section on transportation – e.g. provide default transport distances, provide

requirements for internal transport

Clarify in the PEFCR that treatment of multi-functionality may be applicable in the core

process – e.g. the copper foundry may cast co-products (e.g. billets)

Consider development of more realistic approach for the “pure ”primary copper cathode

data set

Consider development of more realistic proxy for the emission profile related to

transformation of end-of-life products to metal scrap, e.g. mechanical pre-treatment in

shredders (currently zero impact)

83

Product Environment Footprint (PEF)

Supporting study for metal sheet (roofing copper sheet) from KME

Summary report

Goal and Scope

This supporting study relates to roofing copper sheets and strips as an interim product for roof cladding, façade designs, and roof drainage systems, of the KME sites in Osnabrück and Fornaci di Barga and for the year 2013.

The use stage of the sheets is not included in the system boundaries, as the sheets are an interim product.

The current document endeavors to be compliant with the requirements of the ‘Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide’ (Annex II to Recommendation (2013/179/EU), the “Guidance for the implementation of the EU PEF during the EF Pilot Phase” (version no. 5.2) and the Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) for ‘Metal Sheets for various applications’, Version 0.9 of 9 February 2016.

This study did not yet undergo a critical review process.

This study serves the purposes …

(i) To test the applicability of the draft PEFCR

(ii) To validate the outcomes of the screening study (such as the selection of relevant impact categories, life cycle stages, processes and elementary flows)

(iv) To perform supplementary analysis listed in the draft PEFCR

(v) To provide results that can be used as the basis for communicating the PEF profile

Results and findings

The overall data quality of the foreground (primary) data of the sheets manufacturing from cathodes and scrap is 1.0 (excellent), of the overall system 2.0 (very good), respectively 1.6, if the relevance of the processes is considered when calculating the overall DQR.

Relevant assumptions, value judgements and limitations do not apply to the study.

In a number of cases, more specific data sets were used than listed in the original Draft PEFCR (e.g. using country specific electricity data sets from the same source instead of EU-27 data sets).

A number of data sets were used for which no default data set was provided in the original Draft PEFCR (e.g. Hydrogen). Some data gaps of low relevance exist.

84

The Production stage (excl. sheet production) is very frequently the most relevant life cycle stage, with the end-of-life stage often as second most relevant stage. Sheet manufacturing contributes considerably less to most impact categories.

The impact categories that are calculated using robust methods and models and that are moreover quantitatively relevant for copper sheets are Climate change (incl. biogenic carbon), Acidification, Particulate matter/Respiratory inorganics and Eutrophication terrestrial, and Photochemical ozone formation (human health).

The most relevant elementary flows (across the relevant and robust impact categories) are Carbon dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Sulphur dioxide, PM10 – almost identical to the screening study.

The characterized results of the robust and relevant impact categories are very similar to the ones of the screening study, within +/- 5 to 10%.

As a supplementary analysis, the Integrated formula for EoL and EN 15804 module D were applied, the results compared to the model with the Annex V 50/50 EoL formula. The result using EN 15804 is the same as the result from the Integrated formula. The results of the model with the Integrated formula and EN 15804 module D are typically about half as high as of the default model with the Annex V 50/50 formula (between 17% and 60%), owed to the fact that the Integrated formula is fully considering benefits of material recycling, while the 50/50 formula does so only at 50%.

Feedback on draft PEFCR and general requirements

Feedback on the usability of the PEFCR include recommendations for a more efficient PEFCR structure, lacking default data sets e.g. for packaging materials and some consumables, as well as some default parameter values, removal of several quantitatively irrelevant processes from the PEFCR (incl. infrastructure/capital goods), and a few items that would need better clarification.

Identified issues that are already foreseen to be amended on general PEF/OEF level, are having PEF-compliant background data, improved LCIA methods and models, normalization factors and a differentiated weighting set across impacts.

85

12.4 ANNEX IV – METAL PRODUCTION

Mining (Underground mining)

Underground mines have access to the deposits via vertical shafts or inclined roadways. There are usually at least two access routes (one for men and materials and the other for the ore) for safety and ease of ventilation (fresh air comes in one way and is then exhausted out the other). At the required depth, horizontal drifts are drilled to reach the locations of the ore deposit. These are permanent structures and therefore require more rock support. In contrast, drifts inside the ore deposit itself are often temporary, and hence their supports are less substantial. Transport for workers and materials can be by train, truck or conveyor belts. For mining of base metals and precious metals, mining stopes are often backfilled with a mixture of waste-rock, tailing sand and cement. When the mines are deep, underground mining is more economical and efficient than surface mining [BAT_Mining_Tailings].

Figure 12-3: Example of underground mining8

Mining (Open pit mining)

Hard-rock surface mining is conducted by drilling/blasting and then lifting of the broken ore from the surface of the earth. The ore is then transported by loading it either into trucks or onto conveyors for transportation to the processing plant. This lifting is usually by excavator (electric or hydraulic; with shovel or backhoe configuration) or front-end loader. Open pit mining is less cost-intensive than underground mining. The overburden in open-pit mining is heaped near the mine. Open pit mining is suitable for ores and minerals found in shallow layers of the earth’s crust or before the superficial layers of an ore body have been completely exploited [BAT_Mining_Tailings].

8 Source: Encyclodedia Britannica, Inc. (2007)H. Harmrin, Guide to Underground Mining

86

Figure 12-4: Example of open pit mining9

Bauxite (Aluminium) is mined in open pit mines but quite differently from the above schema. For aluminium, the mining depth is limited since average thickness of bauxite deposits varies from 2-20m with a production-weighted average of 5m. An average 2m of overburden layer has to be removed before the bauxite deposits can be extracted. Hence, bauxite mines have an average depth of 5 to 30m.

Hydrometallurgical Route

Hydrometallurgical processes extract valuable metals from ores, concentrates or recovered/secondary materials through the use of water-based chemical processes. In general terms, hydrometallurgy begins with a leaching process to separate the metal from its ore, concentrate or accompanying product. Strong acids or bases are most commonly used to form the leaching solution. For example in aluminium production, sodium hydroxide is used to convert insoluble aluminium oxide to soluble sodium aluminate. In this case, the process also serves to facilitate a purification/concentration step as solid impurities are separated from the aluminium-containing solution as bauxite residue. Other metals may be purified by ion exchange, carbon adsorption or solvent extraction and filtration.

High purity metal is recovered from the solution through a chemical or electrochemical extraction process (sometimes referred to as electrometallurgy). Two of the most common examples of such processes include refinement of copper by electrolysis and the Hall-Héroult process for aluminium smelting.

Pyrometallurgical Route

Pyrometallurgical processes are used to extract metals by removing impurities through the use of high temperatures. Pyrometallurgical processes fall broadly into three categories: Roasting, smelting and refining. Roasting processes are used to purify ores/concentrates through reactions with air at high temperature. Smelting processes are the most common pyrometallurgical processes. Smelting processes use a combination of heat, gases and reducing agents to separate metals from an ore/concentrate. Impurities are driven off in the gas phase or enter a slag, leaving high purity molten metal. In steelmaking, smelting takes place in a blast furnace to extract iron from iron ore with hot air and coke used to enable the reaction and limestone used as a flux to form a slag.

There are pyrometallurgical lead refining processes, molten lead bullion is agitated in kettles where impurities like antimony, copper, silver or lead oxides are removed in the form of a dross.

9 Source: Dept. Of Geology & Geophysics (University of Wyoming) http://www.gg.uwyo.edu/media/mining/diagrams/open-

pit-mine_dim.gif

87

For copper the hydro- or pyrometallurgical routes apply for concentrate or mixed scrap to produce copper anodes. Theses anodes undergo a purification process called electrorefining to produce pure copper (99,99%).

Casting

Metals are principally melted, cleaned and casted. They are often sold in ingots, which can be the case for aluminium and zinc, in slabs, which is often the case for steel and aluminium, or in shaped pieces of different sizes. Metal ingots are made by casting the liquid metal into moulds or into more complex machines such as continuous casting machines where the metal solidifies and in some cases undergoes some first physical transformation. [BAT_Non_Ferrous]. This applies also to copper sold in ingots, cathodes (sheet shape), billets etc.

Rolling mill

Slabs are the starting-material for the fabrication of sheets and strips. The material is preheated in gas or oil fired furnaces, hot and cold rolled and then sent for finishing. Hot rolling is usually done with a dual rolling mill equipped with benches up to 200 m and a final coiling device [BAT_Non_Ferrous].

Figure 12-5: Example Scheme – Rolling

Finishing

The finishing operation includes re-rolling and cutting to required length and width. Surface milling, annealing, pickling, washing and drying are required as intermediate steps to produce high quality strips and sheets. This can also include surface treatment, e.g. galvanization of metal sheet or application of a protective oil layer [BAT_Non_Ferrous]. Surface treatment is not considered within this screening study.

88

12.5 ANNEX V – BENCHMARK AND CLASSES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE

Benchmarking will be further discussed in the framework of the analysis of relevant communication tools and in line with the supporting studies.

89

12.6 ANNEX VI – CO-PRODUCTS IN METAL PRODUCTION

Aluminium

Within aluminium production, the only relevant by-product is dross. Allocation has been avoided as much as possible by applying credits. The LCI model assumes that energy generated from solid waste generated during the production of aluminium is re-introduced to the process and that energy input is reduced accordingly. This energy input can be expected to be very low [EAA].

Table 12-12: Aluminium - List of by-products

Aluminium

(non-exhaustive) List of by-products

Dross

Salt slag

Copper

There are several possible co-products arising from the production chain of copper including e.g. gold, silver and non-metallic co-products like i.e. sulphuric-acid. Following the rules of ISO 14040 and 14044 the existing LCI for primary and secondary copper cathode takes into account the above mentioned principles in the following order:

1. Avoidance of allocation or system expansion (if possible)

2. System expansion (credit for co-product)

3. Allocation/Partitioning on physical relationships (e.g. mass)

4. Allocation/Partitioning on non-physical relationships (e.g. market value)

For further details see the Life Cycle Assessment of Primary Copper Cathode [ECI].

90

Table 12-13: Copper - List of by-products

Copper


Gold

Silver

Lead

Zinc

Cobalt

Molybdenum

Selenium

Tellurium

Tin

Sulphuric acid

Iron silicate sand ( Final slag)

Anode slime for production of other nonferrous metals

Ni SO4 , CuSO4,other salts

Steam

Lead The associated metals in the lead ore can result in the co-production of other metals including e.g. silver, zinc or copper. Non-metallic co-products can also arise from the primary and secondary lead production process.

For further details see the Life Cycle Inventory of Primary and Secondary Lead production.

Table 12-14: Lead – List of by-products

Lead

(non-exhaustive) List of by-products Dross

Steel

Especially within the blast furnace production route, important quantities of valuable by-products are generated from steel production. Worldsteel normally uses system expansion to deal with by-products but has also published a methodology to determine the LCI of steel industry co-products that

91

is based on subdivision by physical partitioning. Where the LCI of by-products needs to be determined the use of appropriate physical relationships that reflect reality of environmental impacts is always preferable to other allocation methods.

Further detailed description can be found in the relevant Life Cycle Assessment Methodology Reports.

Table 12-15: Steel – List of by-products

Steel


BF-Slag

BOF-Slag

Benzene

Tar

Xylene

Coke oven Gas

BF Gas

BOF Gas

92

12.7 ANNEX VII – UPSTREAM SCENARIOS (OPTIONAL)

This section available for additional information if needed.

93

12.8 ANNEX VIII – DOWNSTREAM SCENARIOS (OPTIONAL)

This section available for additional information if needed.

94

12.9 ANNEX IX – NORMALISATION FACTORS

The recommended normalisation factors according to the PEF guidance protocol 5.1 shall be used.

95

12.10 ANNEX X – WEIGHTING FACTORS

The recommended weighting factors according to the PEF guidance protocol 5.2 shall be used. “Until there is an agreed set of European weighting factors, all impact categories shall receive the same weight (weighting factor = 1).” /PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/

96

12.11 ANNEX XI – FOREGROUND DATA

The /PEF pilot Guidance V5.2/ provides the following example for data acquisition of core processes.

Figure 12-6: An example of a partially disaggregated dataset, at level 1, with its activity data and direct elementary flows, and underlying sub-processes in their aggregated form. The grey text indicates elementary flows [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2], Annex E, Figure E-2

It has to be noted, that foreground data consist of activity data, that need to be linked to LCA processes and direct elementary data, that can have direct effect to environment. Both have to be collected. The impact level has to be understood as the sum of impacts from the activity data multiplied with the impact as provided from the LCA dataset, plus the impacts from the scaled direct elementary flows.

Based on this example the following tables provide guidance for data acquisition of at least the core process rolling and finishing (and melting and casting if included in the core process system boundary). It provides a list of typical activity data and direct elementary flows. The related dataset to be applied for the activity data of the core process can be found in ANNEX XII – Background data.

For data collection of core processes the following guidance for selection is provided:

1. All significant flows from the hot spot analysis, see Table 5-2, Table 5-3, Table 5-4 and Table 5-5 of chapter 5.1.5, shall be checked, whether the data appear also as direct elementary flow. In such case it shall be collected.

2. In order to guide data collection the following tables provide a list of typically appearing activity data and direct elementary flows, that should be considered and checked during data acquisition of core processes.

Table 12-16: Copper activity data for Melting & Casting process

Melting & Casting ILCD flow name Unit

97

Input

Cathode t

Internal Scrap t

External Scrap t

Electricity MWh

Fuel (Natural Gas, Butane gas etc.) MJ

Melt Carbon, e.g. char coal t

Oxygen m3

Lime t

Water in (Cooling water) m3

Water in (Drinking water) m3

Fuel (Internal transport) kg

Infrastructure

Output

Copper Slab/Cake t

Slag t

Dust ( waste for recovery) kg

Water out m3

Water loss ( e.g evaporation) kg

Steam MJ

Copper Scrap (internal returns) t

Waste (for recovery /for landfill) kg

Emissions to air

Carbon dioxide carbon dioxide kg

NOx nitrogen dioxide kg

Sulphur dioxide sulfur dioxide kg

Metals ( Cu) copper kg

Dust (total /presence of PM2.5 if any) particles (PM2.5) kg

TOC Total organic carbon

kg

PCDD/F kg

Table 12-17: Copper activity data for Rolling, Milling & Conditioning process

Rolling, Milling & Conditioning ILCD flow name Unit

Input

Electricity MWh

Fuel (Natural Gas, Butane gas etc.) MJ

Slabs/Cakes t

Oxygen, Nitrogen, Hydrogen or similar m3

Lubricant kg

Emulsion product (e.g. oil) kg

Degreasing products (e.g. surfactants ) kg

Pickling solution (e.g. H2SO4, HCl etc.) kg

98

Water in (Process water, cooling water) m3

Water in (Drinking water) m3

Fuel (Internal transport) kg

Infrastructure

Output

Copper sheet t

Copper Scrap Internal (returns) t

Water out m3

Water losses ( e,g evaporation) kg

Used Emulsions kg

Used Lubricant kg

Spent pickling solution kg

Copper scale ( kg) kg

Waste ( for recovery/for landfill) kg

Emissions to air

Carbon dioxide carbon dioxide kg

NOx nitrogen dioxide kg

Emissions to water

Cu copper kg

For aluminium, the foreground processes are composed at least of the rolling processes aiming at converting the slab, i.e. the aluminium ingot, into the aluminium sheet. In the case that process scrap generated along the sheet production chain are remelted within the company, the remelting process is also part of the foreground processes (case 1).

In the other cases, the remelting process is not part of the foreground process (case 2) and secondary datasets shall be used.

Table 12-18: Aluminium activity data for Rolling process (case 1 and 2)

Rolling ILCD flow

name Unit Relative figures per tonne of

sheet product

Input

Aluminium

Rolling ingots (unscalped) kg/t

Energy

Coal MJ/t

Heavy oil MJ/t

Diesel and light fuel oil MJ/t

Natural gas MJ/t

Propane MJ/t

Other source MJ/t

Electricity kWh/t

Ancillary products

Nitrogen kg/t

Emulsion, hot rolling (oil content) kg/t

Oil, cold rolling kg/t

99

Filter earths for cold rolling kg/t

Paper & cardboard for packaging kg/t

Wood for packaging kg/t

Steel for packaging kg/t

Plastic for packaging kg/t

Water

Fresh Water m3/t

Output

Aluminium

Scrap (for recycling) kg/t

Other kg/t

By-products

Metal scrap for recycling, excluding aluminium

kg/t

Emissions to air

Carbon dioxide (CO2) carbon dioxide

kg/t

Particulates / dust kg/t

-% of particles >10µm particles (PM10)

%

-% of particles <2.5µm particles (PM2.5)

%

SO2 sulfur

dioxide kg/t

NOx (as NO2) nitrogen dioxide kg/t

Water

Water output m3/t

Waste (excluding dross, aluminium scrap & demolition waste)

Total hazardous waste kg/t

-% for land-filling %

-% for recycling %

-% for further operations %

Total non hazardous waste kg/t


-% for recycling %


Table 12-19: Aluminium activity data for Remelting process (case 1)

Remelting ILCD flow

name Unit

Relative figures per tonne of ingot

Input

Aluminium

Scrap (process and old scrap) kg/t

Ingot kg/t

Alloying elements – Mn kg/t

Alloying elements – Mg kg/t

Alloying elements – Si kg/t

Others kg/t

Total kg/t

100

Energy

Heavy oil MJ/t

Diesel and light fuel oil MJ/t

Natural gas MJ/t

Propane MJ/t

Other source MJ/t

Electricity kWh/t

Ancillary products

Argon kg/t

Nitrogen kg/t

Chlorine kg/t

Absorbant for exhaust gas treatment kg/t

Other ancillary material input kg/t

Water

Fresh Water m3/t

Output

Aluminium

Unscalped rolling ingots kg/t 1000

Dross / skimmings kg/t

Metal content of dross/skimmings %

Emissions to air

Carbon dioxide (CO2) carbon dioxide

kg/t

Chlorine (as Cl2) chlorine g/t

Other inorganic chlorinated compounds (expressed as HCl) g/t

Particulates / dust kg/t

-% of particles >10µm particles (PM10)

%

-% of particles <2.5µm particles (PM2.5)

%

SO2 sulfur

dioxide kg/t

NOx (as NO2) nitrogen dioxide kg/t

Water

Water output m³/t

By-products

Metal scrap for recycling, excluding aluminium kg/t

Waste (excluding dross, aluminium scrap & demolition waste)

Total hazardous waste kg/t


-% for recycling %


Total non hazardous waste kg/t


-% for recycling %


101

Table 12-20: Lead activity data for Smelting & Refining process

Smelting & Refining ILCD flow name Unit

Input

Air [Operating materials] kg

Ammonium chloride (Salmiac) [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Antimony [Metals] kg

Arsenic [Metals] kg

Arsenic [Non renewable elements] kg

Calcium / Magnesium [Metals] kg

Calcium [Metals] kg

Calcium hydroxide [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Copper [Metals] kg

Flue dust [Waste for recovery] kg

Hard coal coke [Coke, at production] kg

Iron oxide (II-oxide) [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Iron oxides [Metals] kg

Lead (concentrate) [Minerals] kg

Lead (PbSb oxides) [Metals] kg

Lead (PbSn oxides) [Metals] kg

Lead [Metals] kg

Lead bullion [Metals] kg

Lead grids [Metals] kg

Lead paste (desulphurized) [Metals] kg

Lead paste (not desulphurized) [Metals] kg

Lead sinter [Metals] kg

Light fuel oil [Refinery products] kg

Lime quicklime (lumpy) [Minerals] kg

Limestone (calcium carbonate) [Non renewable resources] kg

Limestone [Minerals] kg

Master alloy Sb/Se 80/20% [Metals] kg

Metallics (Feed from preparation) [Metals] kg

Nitrogen gaseous [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Oxygen gaseous [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Potassium hydroxide (potash) [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Pyrite [Metals] kg

Pyrite [Non renewable resources] kg

Reducing agent [Operating materials] kg

Sand [Non renewable resources] kg

Selenium [Metals] kg

Selenium [Non renewable elements] kg

Silver [Metals] kg

Soda (sodium carbonate) [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Sodium hydroxide (100%; caustic soda) [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Sodium nitrate [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Sodium nitrate [Non renewable resources] kg

102

Sodium nitrite [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Sulphur [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Tin (99.92%) [Metals] kg

Tin [Metals] kg

Water [Water] kg

Zinc [Metals] kg

Energy

Electricity [Electric power] MJ

Natural gas [Natural gas, at production] kg

Thermal energy from hard coal [Thermal energy] MJ

Thermal energy from heavy fuel oil [Thermal energy] MJ

Thermal energy from light fuel oil [Thermal energy] MJ

Thermal energy from Natural gas [Thermal energy] MJ

Waste

Glass for recovery (shards) [Waste for recovery] kg

Iron scrap [Waste for recovery] kg

Lead dross [Hazardous waste for disposal] kg

Lead scrap [Waste for recovery] kg

Refinery returns [Waste for recovery] kg

Slag (containing Pb) [Hazardous waste for recovery] kg

Slag (containing Pb) [Hazardous waste] kg

Slime / dross (for rotary furnace) [Waste for recovery] kg

Sludge (from processing) [Waste for recovery] kg

Steel scrap [Waste for recovery] kg

Output

Caustic skim [Metals] kg

Copper-Lead matte [Metals] kg

Flue gas (for treatment) [Others] kg

Lead - silver by-product (95%;5%) [Metals] kg

Lead (99.97%) [Metals] kg

Lead (99.995%) [Metals] kg

Lead [Metals] kg

Lead alloys [Metals] kg

Lead bullion [Metals] kg

Lead-Zinc-Silver (crust) [Metals] kg

PbCa alloy [Metals] kg

PbCu alloy [Metals] kg

PbSb alloy [Metals] kg

PbSn alloy [Metals] kg

Silver Dore# [Metals] kg

Tin [Metals] kg

Tin-Lead alloy [Metals] kg

Emissions to air

Carbon dioxide [Inorganic emissions to air] carbon dioxide kg

Carbon monoxide [Inorganic emissions to air] carbon monoxide kg

Sulphur dioxide [Inorganic emissions to air] sulfur dioxide kg

103

Waste

Flue gas (for treatment) [Waste for recovery] kg

Hazardous waste (unspec.) [Hazardous waste] kg

Lead dross [Hazardous waste for disposal] kg

Metallurgical concentrate [Hazardous waste for recovery] kg

Refinery returns [Waste for recovery] kg

Slag (containing Pb) [Hazardous waste] kg

Slime / dross (for rotary furnace) [Waste for recovery] kg

Waste (unspecified) [Consumer waste] kg

Waste water processing residue [Hazardous waste for recovery] kg

Table 12-21: Lead activity data for Rolling process

Rolling ILCD flow name

Input

Calcium hydroxide [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Copper [Metals] kg

Joint gasket tape [Plastic parts] kg

Lead secondary [Metals] kg

Lead primary [Metals] kg

Lime quicklime (lumpy) [Minerals] kg

Lubricant (unspecified) [Operating materials] kg

Oxygen gaseous [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Polyethylene-film (PE) [Plastic parts] kg

Sodium hydroxide (100%; caustic soda) [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Sodium nitrate [Inorganic intermediate products] kg

Tin (99.92%) [Metals] kg

Water (process water) [Operating materials] kg

Wooden pallets (EURO, 40% moisture) [Materials from renewable raw materials] kg

Energy

Electricity [Electric power] MJ

Thermal energy from diesel fuel [Thermal energy] MJ

Thermal energy from light fuel oil [Thermal energy] MJ

Thermal energy from natural gas [Thermal energy] MJ

Thermal energy from propane [Thermal energy] MJ

Waste

Lead scrap (intern) [Waste for recovery] kg

Lead scrap [Waste for recovery] kg

Output

Lead sheet [Metals] kg

Emissions to air

Aluminium oxide (dust) [Particles to air] particles (PM10) kg

Antimony [Heavy metals to air] antimony kg

Arsenic (+V) [Heavy metals to air] arsenic V kg

Cadmium (+II) [Heavy metals to air] cadmium kg

104

Carbon dioxide [Inorganic emissions to air] carbon dioxide kg

Carbon monoxide [Inorganic emissions to air] carbon monoxide kg

Copper (+II) [Heavy metals to air] copper kg

Dust (PM10) [Particles to air] particles (PM10) kg

Lead (+II) [Heavy metals to air] lead kg

Methane [Organic emissions to air (group VOC)] methane kg

Nickel (+II) [Heavy metals to air] nickel kg

Nitrogen oxides [Inorganic emissions to air] nitrogen dioxide kg

Nitrous oxide (laughing gas) [Inorganic emissions to air] nitrous oxide kg

Tin (+IV) [Heavy metals to air] tin kg

VOC (unspecified) [Organic emissions to air (group VOC)] volatile organic compound

kg

Zinc (+II) [Heavy metals to air] zinc kg

Emissions to water

Arsenic (+V) [Heavy metals to fresh water] arsenic V kg

Chromium (+III) [Heavy metals to fresh water] chromium III kg

Copper (+II) [Heavy metals to fresh water] copper kg

Lead (+II) [Heavy metals to fresh water] lead kg

Nickel (+II) [Heavy metals to fresh water] nickel kg

Waste

Waste water - untreated [Production residues in life cycle] kg

Dross [Waste for recovery] kg

Lead scrap (intern) [Waste for recovery] kg

Table 12-22: Steel activity data for Hot Strip Mill process

Hot Strip Mill ILCD flow name Unit

Inputs

Flows -

Production residues in life cycle -

Waste for recovery -

Hot rolling sludge kg (reference unit)

Oxycutting slag kg (reference unit)

Scales internal kg (reference unit)

Scarfing dust kg (reference unit)

Steel scrap (Home scrap) kg (reference unit)

Used oil kg (reference unit)

Waste water treatment sludge kg (reference unit)

Resources -

Material resources -

Renewable resources -

Water -

Water (fresh water) Water (fresh water) kg (reference unit)

Water (sea water) sea water kg (reference unit)

Water (softened, deionized) kg (reference unit)

Water Cooling fresh Water Cooling fresh kg (reference unit)

Water Cooling sea Water Cooling sea kg (reference unit)

105

Valuable substances -

Energy carrier -

Electric power -

Electricity MJ (reference unit)

Fuels -

Crude oil products -

Heavy fuel oil kg (reference unit)

Light fuel oil kg (reference unit)

Liquefied petroleum gas kg (reference unit)

Natural gas products -

Natural gas kg (reference unit)

Other fuels -

Basic Oxygen Furnace Gas (MJ) (Copy) MJ (reference unit)

Blast furnace gas (MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Coke oven gas (external supply, in MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Coke oven gas (MJ) (Copy) MJ (reference unit)

Smelting furnace gas (MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Mechanical energy -

Compressed air for process m³ (reference unit)

Thermal energy -

Hot water (MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Steam (MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Materials -

Intermediate products -

Inorganic intermediate products -

Ferric chloride kg (reference unit)

Ferrous sulphate (FeSO4) kg (reference unit)

Hydrochloric acid (100%) kg (reference unit)

Nitrogen gaseous kg (reference unit)

Oxygen gaseous kg (reference unit)

Sodium hydroxide (100%; caustic soda) kg (reference unit)

Sodium hypochlorite kg (reference unit)

Sulphuric acid (100%) kg (reference unit)

Organic intermediate products -

Lubricant kg (reference unit)

Propane kg (reference unit)

Metals -

Cold rolled coil (from DSP) kg (reference unit)

Slab (from BOF) kg (reference unit)

Slab (from EAF) kg (reference unit)

Slab (from external supply) kg (reference unit)

Steel strap kg (reference unit)

Minerals -

Lime quicklime (lumpy) kg (reference unit)

Refractories (magnesia, alumina, chromic oxide) kg (reference unit)

Refractories (silica, alumina) kg (reference unit)

Operating materials -

Anticorroding Agent (unspecified) kg (reference unit)

Antifur Agent (unspecified) kg (reference unit)

Detergent kg (reference unit)

106

Grease kg (reference unit)

Water for industrial use kg (reference unit)

Waste water treatment -

Aluminum sulfate kg (reference unit)

anticorroding agent kg (reference unit)

Antifoaming Agent (unspecified) kg (reference unit)


Carbon dioxide kg (reference unit)

Citric acid (C6H8O7) kg (reference unit)

Coagulation agent kg (reference unit)

Compressed air m³ (reference unit)


Flocculating agent kg (reference unit)


Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) kg (reference unit)



Nitric acid kg (reference unit)


Phosphoric acid kg (reference unit)

Polyelectrolyte kg (reference unit)

Power MJ (reference unit)

Soda (sodium carbonate) kg (reference unit)

Sodium bisulphite kg (reference unit)

Sodium chloride (rock salt) kg (reference unit)

Sodium hydrosulfite (Na2O4S2) kg (reference unit)



Sodium nitrite kg (reference unit)

Steam MJ (reference unit)


Water (fresh water) kg (reference unit)

Water (sea water) kg (reference unit)


Outputs

Flows -

Emissions to air -

Heavy metals to air -

Arsenic (+V) arsenic V kg (reference unit)

Cadmium (+II) cadmium kg (reference unit)

Cobalt Cobalt kg (reference unit)

Copper (+II) copper kg (reference unit)

Iron Iron kg (reference unit)

Lead (+II) Lead kg (reference unit)

Manganese (+II) manganese kg (reference unit)

Mercury (+II) mercury kg (reference unit)

Molybdenum molybdenum kg (reference unit)

Nickel (+II) Nickel kg (reference unit)

Selenium selenium kg (reference unit)

Tin (+IV) Tin kg (reference unit)

107

Titanium titanium kg (reference unit)

Vanadium (+III) vanadium kg (reference unit)

Zinc (+II) Zinc kg (reference unit)

Inorganic emissions to air -

Ammonia ammonia kg (reference unit)

Carbon dioxide carbon dioxide kg (reference unit)

Carbon monoxide carbon monoxide kg (reference unit)

Chlorine chlorine kg (reference unit)

Hydrogen chloride hydrogen chloride kg (reference unit)

Hydrogen cyanide (prussic acid) hydrocyanic acid kg (reference unit)

Hydrogen fluoride hydrogen fluoride kg (reference unit)

Hydrogen sulphide hydrogen sulfide kg (reference unit)

Nitrogen oxides nitrogen dioxide kg (reference unit)

Nitrous oxide (laughing gas) nitrous oxide kg (reference unit)

Sulphur hexafluoride sulfur hexafluoride kg (reference unit)

Sulphuric acid sulphuric acid kg (reference unit)

Sulphur oxides (as SO2) sulfur oxides kg (reference unit)

Organic emissions to air (group VOC) -

Group NMVOC to air -

Group PAH to air -

Benzo{a}pyrene benzo[a]pyrene kg (reference unit)

Naphthalene naphthalene kg (reference unit)

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH, carcinogenic) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

kg (reference unit)

Halogenated organic emissions to air -

Dioxins (unspec.) 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin

kg (reference unit)

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB unspecified) polychlorinated biphenyls

kg (reference unit)

NMVOC (unspecified) non-methane volatile organic compounds

kg (reference unit)

Methane methane kg (reference unit)

Particles to air -

Dust (PM2.5) particles (PM2.5) kg (reference unit)

Dust (PM2.5, from stack) kg (reference unit)

Dust (PM10) particles (PM10) kg (reference unit)

Dust (PM10, from stack) kg (reference unit)

Dust (unspecified) particles (PM2.5 - PM10)

kg (reference unit)

Dust (unspecified, from stack) kg (reference unit)

Dust (unspecified, fugitive) kg (reference unit)

Emissions to fresh water -

Analytical measures to fresh water -

Biological oxygen demand (BOD) biological oxygen demand

kg (reference unit)

Chemical oxygen demand (COD) chemical oxygen demand

kg (reference unit)

Nitrogenous Matter (Kjeldahl, as N) kg (reference unit)

Nitrogenous Matter (unspecified, as N) Nitrate kg (reference unit)

Total organic bounded carbon total organic carbon kg (reference unit)

Heavy metals to fresh water -

108



Chromium chromium kg (reference unit)

Cobalt Cobalt kg (reference unit)

Copper (+II) Copper kg (reference unit)

Iron Iron kg (reference unit)

Lead (+II) Lead kg (reference unit)



Metals to water (unspecified) nickel kg (reference unit)


Nickel (+II) nickel kg (reference unit)

Permanganate (MeMnO4) kg (reference unit)


Tin (+IV) Tin kg (reference unit)



Zinc (+II) Zinc kg (reference unit)

Inorganic emissions to fresh water -

Acid (calculated as H+) acid (as H+) kg (reference unit)

Aluminium (+III) aluminium kg (reference unit)

Ammonia (NH4+, NH3, as N) ammonia kg (reference unit)

Barium barium kg (reference unit)

Chloride chloride kg (reference unit)

Cyanide cyanide kg (reference unit)

Fluoride fluoride kg (reference unit)

Nitrate nitrate kg (reference unit)

Nitrite nitrite kg (reference unit)

Nitrogen dioxide nitrogen dioxide kg (reference unit)

Nitrogen nitrate kg (reference unit)

Phosphates (as P) kg (reference unit)

Phosphorus phosphorus, total kg (reference unit)

Sulphate sulfate kg (reference unit)

Sulphide sulfite kg (reference unit)

Sulphite sulfide kg (reference unit)

Organic emissions to fresh water -

Carbon, organically bound total organic carbon kg (reference unit)

Hydrocarbons to fresh water -

Benzene benzene kg (reference unit)

Hexane (isomers) hexane kg (reference unit)

Hydrocarbons (unspecified) hydrocarbons (unspecified)

kg (reference unit)


Oil (unspecified) decane kg (reference unit)

Phenol (hydroxy benzene) phenol kg (reference unit)

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH, unspec.) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

kg (reference unit)

Toluene (methyl benzene) toluene kg (reference unit)

Xylene (isomers; dimethyl benzene) xylene (all isomers) kg (reference unit)

Thiocyanates (CNS-) kg (reference unit)

Other emissions to fresh water -

109

Waste water kg (reference unit)

Particles to fresh water -

Solids (suspended) particles (> PM10) kg (reference unit)


Hazardous waste for disposal -

Hazardous non organic waste for disposal -

Hazardous Waste kg (reference unit)

Hot Rolling Sludge kg (reference unit)


Scale internal kg (reference unit)

Waste from steel works kg (reference unit)

Hazardous organic waste for disposal -


Waste for disposal -

Non hazardous non organic waste for disposal -

Hot Rolling Sludge kg (reference unit)



Non hazardous organic waste for disposal -



Hot rolling sludge kg (reference unit)

Oxycutting slag kg (reference unit)


Refractories kg (reference unit)



Steel scrap (external supply) kg (reference unit)




Resources -



Water -

Water Cooling fresh kg (reference unit)

Water Cooling sea kg (reference unit)


Energy carrier -

Thermal energy -

Hot water from process stages MJ (reference unit)

Steam (from process stages) MJ (reference unit)

Materials -

Metals -

Steel hot rolled coil kg (reference unit)



110

Table 12-23: Steel activity data for Pickling process

Pickling ILCD flow name Unit

Input

Flows -



Iron oxides (by-product of the regeneration of used hydrochloryc pickling bath)

kg (reference unit)

Iron oxide sludge kg (reference unit)

Pickled hot rolled coil sludge kg (reference unit)


Used bath hydrochloric acid kg (reference unit)



Resources -



Water -







Energy carrier -

Electric power -


Fuels -



Other fuels -





Diesel (Internal Transportation) kg (reference unit)

Ethine (acetylene) kg (reference unit)

Mechanical energy -


Thermal energy -


Steam (external supply) (MJ) MJ (reference unit)


Materials -

111












Metals -

Cold rolled coil (from DSP) kg (reference unit)



Minerals -






Oxidation inhibitor kg (reference unit)























112












Output

Flows -

Emissions to air -




Cobalt cobalt kg (reference unit)


Iron iron kg (reference unit)

Lead (+II) lead kg (reference unit)






Tin (+IV) tin kg (reference unit)



Zinc (+II) zinc kg (reference unit)















113



Group PAH to air -




kg (reference unit)



kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)

Oil Mist kg (reference unit)


Particles to air -




kg (reference unit)




kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


Nitrogenous Matter (unspecified, as N) nitrate kg (reference unit)


















114






















Carbon, organically bound kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)











Iron oxide kg (reference unit)



115






Iron oxides kg (reference unit)





Waste for incineration -




Iron oxides (by-product of the regeneration of used hydrochloryc pickling bath)

kg (reference unit)

Iron oxide sludge kg (reference unit)








Resources -



Water -




Materials -




Metals -

Steel pickled hot rolled coil kg (reference unit)



116

Table 12-24: Steel activity data for Cold Rolling process

Cold Rolling ILCD flow name Unit

Input

Flows -



Cold rolling sludge kg (reference unit)

Iron oxides (by-product of the regeneration of used hydrochloryc pickling bath) kg (reference unit)





Resources -



Water -

Water (fresh water) Water (fresh water)

kg (reference unit)

Water (river water) river water kg (reference unit)

Water (sea water) Sea water kg (reference unit)


Water Cooling fresh Water Cooling fresh

kg (reference unit)



Energy carrier -

Electric power -


Fuels -



Other fuels -





Mechanical energy -


Thermal energy -




Materials -


117






Hydrogen kg (reference unit)








Oil (animal) kg (reference unit)

Oil (vegetable) kg (reference unit)

Metals -

Ferro molybdenium kg (reference unit)


Steel pickled hot rolled coil kg (reference unit)


Minerals -





Cold rolling emulsion treatment sludge kg (reference unit)

Detergent kg (reference unit)

Emulsion (unspecified) kg (reference unit)

















118



















Output

Flows -

Emissions to air -








Manganese (+II) Manganese kg (reference unit)

Mercury (+II) Mercury kg (reference unit)















119










Group PAH to air -




kg (reference unit)



kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)

Oils (unspecified) kg (reference unit)


Particles to air -




kg (reference unit)




kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)



Total organic bounded carbon total organic carbon

kg (reference unit)









120






























Carbon, organically bound total organic carbon

kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)


Xylene (isomers; dimethyl benzene) xylene (all isomers)

kg (reference unit)


121









Cold Rolling Sludge kg (reference unit)

Iron oxide kg (reference unit)








Cold Rolling Sludge kg (reference unit)

Iron oxides kg (reference unit)








Cold rolling sludge kg (reference unit)

Iron oxides (by-product of the regeneration of used hydrochloryc pickling bath) kg (reference unit)







Resources -



Water -




Materials -

Metals -

Steel cold rolled coil kg (reference unit)

122





Table 12-25: Steel activity data for Annealing and Tempering process

Annealing and Tempering ILCD flow names Unit

Input

Flows -



Deoiling agent kg (reference unit)




Resources -



Water -







Energy carrier -

Electric power -


Fuels -



Other fuels -






Mechanical energy -


Thermal energy -



123


Materials -



Ammonia kg (reference unit)

Chromium solution, as H2CrO4 kg (reference unit)






Nickel carbonate (NiCO3) kg (reference unit)






Synthetic gas (H2, N2, from NH3 cracking) kg (reference unit)



Oil (animal) kg (reference unit)


Metals -



Minerals -





Biocides kg (reference unit)



Oxidation inhibitor kg (reference unit)











124
























Output

Flows -

Emissions to air -



















125















Group PAH to air -




kg (reference unit)



kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


Particles to air -




kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)








126







































kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)


127






Solids (suspended) kg (reference unit)





Tempering sludge kg (reference unit)






Tempering Sludge kg (reference unit)









Refractories kg (reference unit)






Resources -



Water -




Energy carrier -

Thermal energy -

Steam (from process stages, in MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Materials -

Metals -

Steel finished cold rolled coil kg (reference unit)

128




Table 12-26: Steel activity data for Hot-dip Galvanasing process

Hot-dip Galvanising ILCD flow name Unit

Input

Flows -



Chromium sludge kg (reference unit)




Zinc sludge kg (reference unit)

Resources -



Water -







Energy carrier -

Electric power -


Fuels -






Other fuels -





Diesel (Internal Transportation) kg (reference unit)

Liquified Petroleum Gas (Internal Transportation) kg (reference unit)


129

Mechanical energy -


Thermal energy -



Materials -



Ammonia kg (reference unit)

Argon kg (reference unit)

Chromium solution, as H2CrO4 kg (reference unit)







Silicon kg (reference unit)





Synthetic gas (H2, N2, from NH3 cracking) kg (reference unit)


Ethine (acetylene) kg (reference unit)

Fire retardant kg (reference unit)

Hardener kg (reference unit)



Materials from renewable raw materials -

Timber (12% moisture; 10.7% H2O content) kg (reference unit)

Metals -

Aluminium kg (reference unit)

Antimony kg (reference unit)

Lead kg (reference unit)


Steel finished cold rolled coil kg (reference unit)

Steel hot-dip galvanised coil kg (reference unit)


Zinc kg (reference unit)

Minerals -




130





Surface cleaning agent (unspecified) kg (reference unit)

Surfactants (tensides) kg (reference unit)


Packaging -

Corrugated board boxes kg (reference unit)

Plastics -

Protection foil (PE-LD) kg (reference unit)

































Output

131

Flows -

Emissions to air -























Fluorine fluorine kg (reference unit)







Phosphoric acid phosphoric acid kg (reference unit)

Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) kg (reference unit)






Group PAH to air -




kg (reference unit)


132


kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


Particles to air -




kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)



























133

















Hexane (isomers) Hexane (isomers) kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)








Emissions to sea water -

Analytical measures to sea water -


kg (reference unit)


kg (reference unit)


Nitrogenous Matter (unspecified, as N) kg (reference unit)

Solids (dissolved) sodium kg (reference unit)


Heavy metals to sea water -





134

Copper copper kg (reference unit)


Lead lead kg (reference unit)

Manganese manganese kg (reference unit)

Mercury mercury kg (reference unit)


Nickel nickel kg (reference unit)


Vanadium vanadium kg (reference unit)

Zinc zinc kg (reference unit)

Inorganic emissions to sea water -




Chloride choride kg (reference unit)








Phosphorus kg (reference unit)

Sulphate sulphate kg (reference unit)

Sulphide sulphide kg (reference unit)

Sulphite sulphite kg (reference unit)

Organic emissions to sea water -

Hydrocarbons to sea water -



kg (reference unit)




kg (reference unit)




Other emissions to sea water -

Waste water sea water kg (reference unit)

Particles to sea water -





135

Chromium Solution kg (reference unit)



Zinc Sludge kg (reference unit)




Municipal waste kg (reference unit)






Timber (12% moisture / 10.7% H2O) kg (reference unit)



Aluminum kg (reference unit)

Chromium solution kg (reference unit)

Corrugated board boxes kg (reference unit)








Waste incineration of plastics (unspecified) fraction in municipal solid waste (MSW)

kg (reference unit)


Wood kg (reference unit)

Zinc (dross) kg (reference unit)

Zinc dust kg (reference unit)

Zinc sludge kg (reference unit)

Resources -



Water -




Energy carrier -

Thermal energy -

Steam (from process stages, in MJ) MJ (reference unit)

Materials -

136

Metals -

Steel hot-dip galvanised coil kg (reference unit)



Table 12-27: Steel activity data for Boiler process

Boiler ILCD flow names Unit

Input

Flows -




Resources -



Water -


Water (river water) river water kg (reference unit)






Energy carrier -

Electric power -


Fuels -


Diesel High Sulphur kg (reference unit)

Diesel Low Sulphur kg (reference unit)

Heavy fuel oil kg (reference unit)



Hard coal products -

Coal kg (reference unit)



Other fuels -




Off gas from alternative iron making (used as fuel, MJ) MJ (reference unit)

137


Mechanical energy -


Thermal energy -


Materials -






Potassium hydroxide (potash) kg (reference unit)







Tar kg (reference unit)

Minerals -










Output

Flows -

Emissions to air -











138


kg (reference unit)


Particles to air -




kg (reference unit)





kg (reference unit)
















Tar kg (reference unit)

Resources -



Water -




Energy carrier -

Electric power -


Thermal energy -



139

For primary data collection beyond the processes discussed and listed above (e.g. upstream processes), the user of this PEFCR should follow the same principles and rules that apply for the core processes (see chapter 5.3).

Due to the multiple environmental aspects, technical complexity and sector specific characteristics it is recommended to contact relevant environmental and LCA-expertised persons with the respective sector knowledge.

For example:

European Copper Institute (ECI), Copper Alliance: The environmental profile of copper products, 2012

European Aluminium Association (EAA): Environmental profile Report for the Aluminium industry, April 2013

European Lead Sheet Industry Association (ELSIA): Life Cycle Assessment Report of Lead Sheet, May 2014

Methodology Report: Life Cycle Inventory for steel products, World Steel Association, March 2011

International Lead Zinc Research Organisation (ILZRO): Life Cycle Inventory – LCI of Primary and Secondary Lead production, February 2011

These resources also include high quality industry average datasets, in case the user decides to rely on datasets that are most up-to-date, accurate and representative of the current market situation.

Further information can be found under 12.12.1 below.

140

12.12 ANNEX XII – BACKGROUND DATA

[PEF Guide 2013/179/EU, section 5.8]:”Generic data refers to data that are not based on direct measurements or calculation of the respective processes in the system. Generic data can be either sector-specific, i.e. specific to the sector being considered for the PEF study, or multi- sector. Examples of generic data include:

- Data from literature or scientific papers;

- Industry-average life-cycle data from life-cycle-inventory databases, industry association reports, government statistics etc.”

In the course of the PEF development it is specifically defined in [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2, section 3.9]: “For all final PEFCRs developed during the EF pilot phase secondary data shall be those provided for free by the Commission or created by the Technical Secretariat and provided in the PEFCR. In case a secondary dataset is not available among those provided by the Commission, then they shall be provided in one of the following form (in hierarchical order):

1. To use one of the PEF-compliant datasets freely available in a Life Cycle Data Network node and considered being a good proxy for the missing one

2. To use another dataset coming from a free or commercial source. This dataset shall have a re-calculated DQR not higher than required in the DNM.

Any deviation from the hierarchy above shall be duly justified in the final PEFCR. Any other source of secondary data shall not be used in the final PEFCR.”

The following tables provide the list of datasets to be used for the activity data of the core processes to be used in case of data acquisition.

141

Table 12-28: datasets to be used for activity data of copper processes

Material/ Process

Dataset name Primary source Year Geographical reference

GUID DQR (GaBi)

DQR criteria

Primary cathode PE/ICA/ECI 2012/2005

EU-27 {2B8627D2-C668-46B5-8320-A352024CA25D}

1.5

Secondary cathode PE/ICA/ECI 2012/2005

EU-27 {41AB5B10-00F6-4976-A289-496C0F0E7922}

1.5

Clean scrap PE/ICA/ECI 2012/2005

EU-27 {07C81FBB-E7D5-481A-913E-4CD64CB8A0DB}

1.5

Energy

Thermal energy from natural gas PE 2011 EU-27 {CFE8972E-6B51-4A17-B499-D78477FA4294}

1.8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 EU-27 {001B3CB7-B868-4061-8A91-3E6D7BCC90C6}

1.8

Natural gas mix PE 2010 EU-27 {C6387E19-933F-4726-A7AD-7A8050AA418C}

1.8

Charcoal production PE 2013 BR {C871CEFF-D2DD-47FE-B13C-D528C3A3D84E}

Water

Tap water PE 2013 EU-27 {DB009013-338F-11DD-BD11-0800200C9A66}

1.7

Process water PE 2013 EU-27 {DB009016-338F-11DD-BD11-0800200C9A66}

1.7

Auxiliary materials

Lubricant (aqueous emulsion of fatty substances) PE 2013 DE {0C1AC2DA-2D9C-4C4A-B88B-ACD5872C05A9}

1.8

Lime (CaO; quicklime lumpy) PE 2013 DE {0C1AC2DA-2D9C-4C4A-B88B-ACD5872C05A9}

1.8

Nitrogen PE 2012 EU-27 {4A259AEC-C66F-4375-AA9E-5B8C745ADDC0}

1.8

Oxygen PE 2013 EU-27 {DE25DD0E-0072-4E8D-AF0D-DF6B17C05E1E}

1.8

Internal Logistic & Transport

Diesel mix at refinery PE 2011 GLO {244524ed-7b85-4548-b345-f58dc5cf9dac}

1.8

Capital goods

142

Infrastructure

Aluminium sheet mix PE 2012 DE {DFD81AC6-600B-4867-B59A-C27AA33C5763}

1.8

Brass (CuZn20) PE 2013 EU-27 {AC2760C3-78B6-479C-8ADF-FD933AEF33F1}

1.8

Concrete C20/25 PE 2013 DE {8C7EA01A-6B4F-45C5-8EA7-ED2F9D54CC51}

1.5

Float flat glass PE 2013 EU-27 {641CA70F-FCA3-4F27-BAC0-B8AD236EFAFF}

Copper Sheet Mix DKI/ECI 2012 EU-27 {D4587458-3DD0-4C6E-A1F8-73D440813310}

1.5

Epoxy Resin (EP) Mix PE 2012 DE {50125A08-978E-4156-BCC0-2D13EC3B49C7}

1.5

Glass fibres PE 2013 DE {EE377281-8D03-4DBE-90BF-FA51F61556A2}

1.8

Lead PE 2013 DE {FD9DB253-4998-11DD-AE16-0800200C9A66}

2.2

Lubricants at refinery PE 2011 DE {5CB700AC-6476-4CE3-A0CE-8486AAEC945B}

1.8

Solid construction timber (softwood) (EN15804 A1-A3)

PE 2013 DE {5934211E-A447-4A61-90ED-86803BC879C3}

1.8

Polyethylene Cross-Linked (PEXa) PE 2013 DE {0CB4A09E-0614-4754-8773-C9EFA124C04E}

1.7

Polypropylene GMT part PE 2013 DE {1B830C14-5D47-48C0-9A95-4BE1D4E6C632}

1.7

Cast iron component (EN15804 A1-A3) PE 2013 DE {54041876-2BAE-4229-8AD1-4AAE5E8B91A9}

1.5

Polyvinylchloride granulate (Suspension, S-PVC) PE 2012 BE {BC010A86-AD91-4FAC-98FA-4AB00CF5ADB4}

1.5

Stone mastic asphalt SMA (EN15804 A1-A3) PE 2013 DE {379A5A8D-0AF6-4626-ADA5-AB9D156BD4B6}

1.8

Steel cold rolled coil PE 2013 DE {E4DECB5D-6711-42AA-86E9-03204B518AC3}

1.5

Polystyrene granulate (PS) PE 2013 DE {077F6DEA-B740-4604-AFEC-84120C4655AB}

1.5

Styrene-Butadiene Rubber (SBR) Mix PE 2013 DE {9B317E5C-A721-4912-BB28-06BD6B6FBE9F}

1.5

Zinc redistilled mix PE 2013 DE {19720938-1090-44EE-AD57-6D2BE1320D67}

1.5

Stainless Steel slab (X6CrNi17) PE 2013 DE {DB14C527-8AB6-4F5C-B21C-D5C789E94D82}

1.5

143

Table 12-29: datasets to be used for activity data of aluminium core processes (case 1: Rolling and remelting, case 2: only rolling)

Material/ Process

Dataset name Case Primary source

Year Geograp. reference

GUID DQR (GaBi)

DQR criteria

Aluminium

Energy

Thermal energy from natural gas 1&2 PE 2011 EU-27 {CFE8972E-6B51-4A17-B499-D78477FA4294}

1,8

Thermal energy from light fuel oil (LFO) 1&2 PE 2011 EU-27 {261369F8-8AD9-4CAC-81BC-4F308F2D80BE}

1,8

Electricity grid mix 1&2 PE 2011 EU-27 {001B3CB7-B868-4061-8A91-3E6D7BCC90C6}

1,8

Thermal energy (natural gas) to Propane 1&2 PE 2010 EU-27 {DA9376F1-F043-44FD-AC37-3C1AD26A60B8}

Thermal energy from heavy fuel oil (HFO) 1 PE 2011 EU-27 {69AA7B8E-842A-41EE-B0BD-DBE368E16F9F}

1,8

Water

Process water 1&2 PE 2013 EU-27 {DB009015-338F-11DD-BD11-0800200C9A66}

1,7

Auxiliary materials & processes

Lubricant (aqueous emulsion of fatty substances) 1&2 PE 2013 DE {0C1AC2DA-2D9C-4C4A-B88B-ACD5872C05A9}

1,8

Argon (gaseous) 1 PE 2013 DE {0DA1788B-4E73-47E1-A484-2167AF7839F0}

1,7

Chlorine mix 1 PE 2012 DE {50ACDFF1-D4CC-4FD2-AA80-D5BFDA4F32A7}

1,5

Lime (CaO; quicklime lumpy) 1 PE 2013 DE {0C1AC2DA-2D9C-4C4A-B88B-ACD5872C05A9}

1,8

Nitrogen 1 PE 2013 EU-27 {4A259AEC-C66F-4375-AA9E-5B8C745ADDC0}

Sodium chloride (rock salt) 1 PE 2012 EU-27 {AEC293F4-A509-4422-9929-B8612C0F0188}

1,8

EAA aluminium clean scrap remelting datasets 2 EAA/PE 2010 EU-27

Manganese 1 PE 2015 ZA {a23e6cc7-4bff-4d17-8ce1-64f58922ca4e}

1,5

144

Magnesium 1 PE 2015 CN {47cff7c4-6816-4093-a8e4-6a690bde0613}

1,5

Silicon Mix (99%) 1 PE 2015 GLO {b356811f-fba4-4faf-9a32-5bfc950b8beb}

1,8

Waste treatment

Commercial waste in municipal waste incinerator 1&2 PE 2013 EU-27 {90D0DF95-53B8-40FE-A695-3ED01F53CE47}

1,8

Landfill for inert matter (Unspecific construction waste)

1&2 PE 2013 EU-27 {68B5B6E9-290B-47C7-A1FA-465588D81906}

1,7

Salt slag recycling (scrap rotary) EUROPEAN ALUMINIUM 2005

1 EUROPEAN ALUMINIUM

2005 RER

RER: dross recycling EAA update 2010 1 EUROPEAN ALUMINIUM

2010 RER

Packaging

Wooden pallets (EURO, 40% moisture) 1&2 PE 2012 EU-27 {79BDEEF3-BCF4-4E52-B4B0-8B5375961C5E}

1,8

Polyethylene Film (PE-HD) without additives 1&2 PE 2013 DE {19EE9FE9-8C8F-4FF1-BBBD-715466EBA346}

1,7

Steel sheet HDG 1&2 PE 2012 DE

Corrugated board (average composition) XX-02 1&2 FEFCO 2012 RER {89BF11C5-EB26-11E0-9572-0800200C9A66}

Table 12-30: datasets to be used for activity data of lead processes Smelting & Refining

Material/ Process

Dataset name Primary source


GUID DQR (GaBi)

DQR criteria

Raw Materials

Aluminium ingot mix PE 2013 DE {01D9DFDD-DFBC-4BDE-B7BA-6233AE10A31A}

1,8

Coke mix PE 2011 DE {0AF25D7C-55B0-4EE0-B9EA-9B5822A91444}

1,8

Copper PE 2013 SE {D3C290CE-C977-44C7-ADFD-FDB03912E697}

1,5

Copper mix (99,999% from electrolysis) PE 2013 GLO {301D375B-4F27-43F2-BBE0-89F87CAE0DF1}

1,8

145

Silver mix PE 2013 GLO {521F27F6-95CF-4A87-AE24-3D60124EBC20}

2,2

Tin PE 2013 GLO {CD01E11A-8582-4E67-9A3C-F49192DCF753}

2,2

Zinc PE 2011 SE {12011431-23E0-4C74-8021-E2402CC46BDD}

Energy

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 AT {F8A2668D-9B8C-4759-B736-1B848A211902}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 SE {0982D3BC-3459-44F8-82D4-C0B90B3BCAFC}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 DE {48AB6F40-203B-4895-8742-9BDBEF55E494}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 BE {383A1240-40C5-483A-BFAE-1DBE2CD63F92}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 CZ {B255D9FC-82EA-4F5C-ACF2-30E13DF2C86A}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 GB {00043BD2-4563-4D73-8DF8-B84B5D8902FC}

1,8

Natural gas mix PE 2011 SE {ADEEBEF2-B0B7-439C-A129-2DF1FE128C4D}

1,8

Natural gas mix PE 2011 DE {297D0F72-A589-4624-A088-B33E12ECCA15}

1,8

Natural gas mix PE 2011 EU-27 {C6387E19-933F-4726-A7AD-7A8050AA418C}

1,8

Natural gas mix PE 2011 GB {D67B8058-F299-40C1-A985-6C6F3F8B2646}

1,8

Thermal energy from heavy fuel oil (HFO) PE 2011 EU-27 {69AA7B8E-842A-41EE-B0BD-DBE368E16F9F}

1,8


1,8

Thermal energy from natural gas PE 2011 BE {64FEF8F5-3B34-4B58-9BD7-24871156AFE2}

1,8

Auxiliary materials

Ammonium chloride (Salmiac, Solvay-process) PE 2013 DE {B822F8A5-51A1-4139-A873-88682788FADD}

1,8

Antimony (from antimony tri oxide) PE 2006 ZA {965D4A92-F893-4F3B-9BC6-59896813B873}

Calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2; dry; slaked lime) PE 2012 DE {63FBBB79-50AA-4E3F-A2CC-29AC76F51182}

1,8

146

Calcium silicate PE 2013 EU-27 {898618B7-3306-11DD-BD11-0800200C9A66}

2,0

Caustic soda mix PE 2012 BE {4F6D4794-46C7-4200-AB99-E63C6C1EF8F7}

1,5

Iron (II) sulphate PE 2012 DE {33243685-F975-462D-9F01-BE2865C3B10A}

1,5


1,8

Limestone hydrate (Ca(OH)2) (Version 2006) PE 2000 DE {7489BE48-7C9D-45CA-9964-719A5EB64847}

Oxygen PE 2012 DE {A6334129-F3D4-46EC-A4F3-41D2B549C92D}

1,7

Oxygen PE 2013 NO {CEC773B5-653E-4090-81F0-B35734FFA3DD}

1,7

Oxygen PE 2013 BE {0F793E81-307E-4627-ADAD-8992ADAE9E7B}

1,7

Oxygen PE 2013 GB {2F4DB8B8-8B1E-4AE6-869E-6714BBBEF4C1}

1,7

Petrol coke at refinery PE 2011 BR {4BF3CD06-F2D0-4343-8F0E-BF77050E4D19}

1,8

Potassium hydroxide (KOH) PE 2012 DE {C600F04F-E6B4-4354-B79A-F29B6444E75B}

1,7

Soda (Na2CO3) PE 2013 DE {615F6504-AF48-436D-A345-8FE47693B403}

1,5

Sodium hydroxide (100%; caustic soda) PE 1996 (calc. 2005)

ELCD/ PlasticsEurope

{F7BA74A4-E81C-4084-97C9-B9DD5456446C}

Sodium hydroxide (from chlorine-alkali electrolysis, diaphragm) PE 2012 DE {6C6AD0BC-D2D1-4740-A1B8-249630D1B6A3}

1,5

Sodium nitrate PE 2012 DE {3469924F-74EA-4643-842C-35FA9B3408DD}

1,8

Sulphur (elemental) at refinery PE 2011 NL {AADF3D33-FE5D-4D34-8E2B-BBB90D56ECDC}

1,8

Sulphur (elemental) at refinery PE 2011 EU-27 {EC450CE7-4598-4CA5-9AB3-452FF1C750A4}

1,8

Sulphur (elemental) at refinery PE 2011 GB {00E04DC2-4468-46C8-BDC4-5B1920B28D6D}

1,8

Value of scrap worldsteel 2007 GLO {B33A6B69-A161-451A-8881-459894841187}

147

Table 12-31: datasets to be used for activity data of lead processes Rolling

Material/ Process



GUID DQR (GaBi)

DQR criteria

Raw Material

Tin PE 2013 GLO {CD01E11A-8582-4E67-9A3C-F49192DCF753}

2,2

Copper mix (99,999% from electrolysis) PE 2013 GLO {301D375B-4F27-43F2-BBE0-89F87CAE0DF1}

1,8

Secondary lead mix PE/ILZRO 2012/2008/09 EU-27 {148C58A8-D69B-488D-9FC7-39074050ADA5}

1,5

Waste

Waste water treatment (contains organic load) PE 2010 EU-27 {DB009020-338F-11DD-BD11-0800200C9A66}

1,8

Energy

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 DE {48AB6F40-203B-4895-8742-9BDBEF55E494}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 GB {00043BD2-4563-4D73-8DF8-B84B5D8902FC}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 ES {F0A6C237-873E-474E-A9CB-BCFF8A6B3FE2}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 NL {BA65B4F5-B979-4609-81FF-D0E16D8D2E59}

1,8

Electricity grid mix PE 2011 FR {C8D7F695-1C5B-4F9A-8491-8C58C20C190F}

1,8

Diesel fuel supplied and combusted in diesel generator (direct) PE 2011 EU-27 {EAC3260E-3C60-4FC0-9F1C-21CB1FE491D2}

1,7


1,8

Thermal energy from LPG PE 2011 EU-27 {9CF765FA-2226-421B-A013-1869B9081D70}

1,8

Thermal energy from propane PE 2011 US {9AF2AF7F-E514-4E25-B398-C7AB380493FE}

1,8

Auxiliary materials

148

Process water PE 2013 RER {DB009015-338F-11DD-BD11-0800200C9A66}

1,7

Lubricants at refinery PE 2011 EU-27 {BDFAC21C-7415-46AF-ACBC-8916CB95B9B8}

1,8

Oxygen PE 2013 EU-27 {DE25DD0E-0072-4E8D-AF0D-DF6B17C05E1E}

1,8

Caustic soda mix PE 2012 DE {B8D4609E-05BD-4398-973A-12FA3865E373}

1,5

Sodium nitrate PE 2012 DE {3469924F-74EA-4643-842C-35FA9B3408DD}

1,8

Calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2; dry; slaked lime) PE 2012 DE {63FBBB79-50AA-4E3F-A2CC-29AC76F51182}

1,8


1,8

Packaging

Wooden pallets (EURO, 40% moisture) PE 2012 EU-27 {79BDEEF3-BCF4-4E52-B4B0-8B5375961C5E}

1,8

Polyethylene Film (PE-HD) without additives PE 2013 DE {19EE9FE9-8C8F-4FF1-BBBD-715466EBA346}

1,7

Expanded polypropylene foam packing (EPP; estimation) PE 2012 EU-27 {FA67E5A9-8C2F-436D-B9FC-A08D3B4A71B6}

1,7

Table 12-32: datasets to be used for activity data of steel processes

Material/ Process



GUID DQR (GaBi)

DQR criteria

Nickel mix GaBi 2013 GLO {87B2BB39-FF19-427E-A6A2-68A870FCECBC} 1,8

Ammonia mix (NH3) GaBi 2012 EU-27 {7963A3C7-823F-47A7-A761-CD04A4FECC40} 1,7

Coking coal mix GaBi 2011 GLO {29088CF6-37FF-423F-8A09-313B3DC023B3} 1,8

Dolomite calcination GaBi 2012 EU-27 {A0E53327-8FA7-4A12-AE98-BAF4B5E3A74C} 1,5

Hydrochloric acid mix (100%) GaBi 2012 DE {B80355FF-D10C-42BB-A0AF-49DEA028C527} 1,5

Magnesium GaBi 2013 CN {47CFF7C4-6816-4093-A8E4-6A690BDE0613} 1,5

149

Propane at refinery GaBi 2011 EU-27 {F8389945-6532-4128-A98B-B0FB3F461ECA} 1,8

Argon [Inorganic intermediate products] GaBi 2013 DE {0DA1788B-4E73-47E1-A484-2167AF7839F0} 1,7

Copper mix (99,999% from electrolysis) GaBi 2013 GLO {301D375B-4F27-43F2-BBE0-89F87CAE0DF1} 1,8

Iron Ore 2008 worldsteel {964BB2CA-99EA-47B0-A0ED-ADA91C661BE3}

Aluminium ingot mix GaBi 2013 EU-27 {DD93261C-D6DA-44EC-A842-78B4A42C2884} 1,8

Bauxite GaBi 2013 EU-27 {9284544B-5DC6-453F-BFEA-27472D7CC830} 1,8

Diesel mix at refinery GaBi 2011 EU-27 {244524ED-7B85-4548-B345-F58DC5CF9DAC} 1,8

Dolomite mining GaBi 2012 DE {6EA9BA93-A353-4CAC-BE9B-AD300095888F}

Electricity grid mix GaBi 2011 GB {00043BD2-4563-4D73-8DF8-B84B5D8902FC} 1,8

Ferro manganese GaBi 2013 ZA {48B45900-1A16-4CC0-91F7-ECC739BC3CE9} 1,8

Ferro silicon mix GaBi 2013 GLO {D6FA768A-7C27-4974-93CD-69F4E2E3120B} 1,8

Hard coal mix GaBi 2011 GB {27C4CA8F-245E-4BE5-A74B-2E8FA4FBD0F1} 1,8

Heavy fuel oil at refinery (1.0wt.% S) GaBi 2011 EU-27 {50462B0D-7D2B-40D4-843E-9857061E3C08} 1,8

Light fuel oil at refinery GaBi 2011 EU-27 {909C9A65-3B16-4923-9C91-FE585CA9D194} 1,8

Lime (CaO; quicklime lumpy) GaBi 2013 DE {0C1AC2DA-2D9C-4C4A-B88B-ACD5872C05A9} 1,8

Limestone (CaCO3; washed) GaBi 2012 DE {F5DCD4D0-6EE3-424C-A82B-ADDF92BBD66D} 1,8

Lubricants at refinery GaBi 2011 EU-27 {BDFAC21C-7415-46AF-ACBC-8916CB95B9B8} 1,8

Natural gas mix GaBi 2011 GB {D67B8058-F299-40C1-A985-6C6F3F8B2646} 1,8

Silica sand (flour) GaBi 2013 DE {D5205A28-5D8E-4D15-9301-1E6833465043} 1,8

Sulphur (elemental) at refinery GaBi 2011 EU-27 {EC450CE7-4598-4CA5-9AB3-452FF1C750A4} 1,8

150

Ferro-Vanadium GaBi 2012 ZA {C720D386-55C6-4AB8-B613-ADC084FEFA40} 1,7

Manganese GaBi 2013 ZA {A23E6CC7-4BFF-4D17-8CE1-64F58922CA4E} 1,5

Silica sand (Excavation and processing) GaBi 2013 DE {4CB83C4D-5A3E-460D-9969-9C42AD57C1FE} 1,8

BOF route, 1kg slab, weighted average, EU (inverse) worldsteel {69D8C9D0-8063-4F26-961E-B1FFF0143A61}

EAF route, 1kg slab, weighted ave (EU & EU Scrap) worldsteel {8E1E5A30-A791-48F2-A26A-633966CB03DF}

1kg global HRC for steel strap worldsteel {34576442-7C47-4B1A-BE1D-CC52B1F70AF4}

BOF route, 1kg pellet, weighted average (pellet upstream) worldsteel {1A1AB678-41A3-4B4D-861A-F4003E1EB7F9}

BOF route, 1kg sinter, weighted average (sinter/pellet fines) worldsteel {FDCE4570-1735-40F1-9EC7-88020A7F3EF8}

BOF route, 1kg slab, weighted average, global (inverse) worldsteel {9531D761-CCC6-42B1-AB0E-99F9AB9CB12C}

Coke 1kg weighted average, upstream Global 2009 worldsteel {868D46E3-7E87-4555-9A13-B2E2B481C942}

DRI, 1kg (for external), 2009 worldsteel {1E32A337-D6E5-4E5F-81EB-F3E234D292A3}

EAF route, 1kg Slab, weighted ave, Global scrap worldsteel {3FC79687-075D-44E6-953C-E9E8457F8DD6}

Electrode mix GaBi {980DC7BA-7B67-49D8-9511-CEEBE238CECB}

Ferro Chromium (ICDA world average) GaBi {D096C521-5CE4-48E8-BBF0-9BA84E9AB494}

Hydrogen GaBi 2013 EU-27 {C5939440-AAA9-47AD-A415-BB07130ADA34} 1,8

Insulation brick (high in alumina) GaBi {8E28B660-6BD5-4D3F-A138-984FE2AB6E54}

Nitrogen GaBi 2013 EU-27 {4A259AEC-C66F-4375-AA9E-5B8C745ADDC0} 1,8

Oxygen GaBi {9A34828C-B16A-449E-B61A-F64A5553853D}

Power grid mix (Version 2006) GaBi {FFE526F1-6FA2-49DC-91C0-DD2BA5BB2D0B}

Sodium hypochlorite solution GaBi 2012 DE {C12C6566-82D3-42EC-AF58-136D97E4043D} 1,5

151

Titanium dioxide pigment GaBi 2012 EU-27 {F6AD0631-33EA-42F5-971D-6DC43EFA2248} 1,8

Transport GaBi {C23F0BA4-A375-441C-B2A4-DF65BB428825}

Zinc mix GaBi 2012 GLO {7DA4F1AD-4E3D-49E2-8A93-CCF349F45D57} 1,5

Bulk commodity carrier/10000 to 200000 dwt/high se (Scope 3) ? {E491361C-5BE7-488C-85A2-D499091D7410}

Bulk commodity carrier/1500 to 20000 dwt /coast (Scope 3) ? {54B7B09B-C520-4BE7-8B9F-D01B430DEB07}

Rail transport-Diesel (Scope 3) ? {DF4DEC24-A70C-44D0-B953-854269D64B03}

Rail transport-Electric (Scope 3) ? {2DC8C8FB-340A-4087-80E7-D57160593A90}

River freight ship/4400t payload/downstream (Scope 3) ? {D3216177-3D95-4A4E-9BF1-B381A0213645}

River freight ship/4400t payload/upstream (Scope 3) ? {FB83255A-F029-4630-9F15-948A0CFDAC8F}

Small transporter/3.5t total cap./2t payload/local (Scope 3) ? {7230C6D6-368E-48F6-8DDF-4963F3AE8F47}

Tanker/10000 to 300000 dwt/high sea (Scope 3) ? {8BCE2F19-2D92-42CD-96FF-4B89C17FD1C9}

Truck/16t total cap./10.3t payload/local (Scope 3) ? {9EC53DB9-7E30-44A8-94B1-BC39A1DB6785}

Truck-trailer/38t total cap./26t payload/local (Scope 3) ? {8926DBBE-9E1B-4C1C-95E3-D233D481361A}

Truck-trailer/38t total cap./26t payload/long dist (Scope 3) ? {C5F991E8-B462-4F58-9E36-C883E08D95B4}

Thermal energy from natural gas GaBi 2011 GB {9006A870-750C-49B1-90B1-BC48372B88CA} 1,8

Gravel (Grain size 2/32) (EN15804 A1-A3) GaBi 2013 DE {5571FBD8-FA36-4576-BA6A-E332E250433B} 1,8

Cement (CEM I 32.5) (EN15804 A1-A3) GaBi 2013 DE {B1DF41C3-D646-4CB2-B4E5-45C55E822727} 1,8

Cement (CEM I 42.5) (EN15804 A1-A3) GaBi 2013 DE {C41A795D-8006-4F3A-8131-B18DA81C0418} 1,8

Cement (CEM I 52.5) (EN15804 A1-A3) GaBi 2013 DE {6EB8DA16-5AE2-41C0-8A05-8F3E60BCAB3E} 1,8

Cement (CEM III 32.5) (EN15804 A1-A3) GaBi 2013 DE {9BFD948B-2BE7-4C76-AE64-67B2DA30B15C} 1,8

152

Fertilizer credit Lime (CaO; quicklime lumpy) GaBi 2013 DE

{0C1AC2DA-2D9C-4C4A-B88B-ACD5872C05A9} 1,8

Benzene mix GaBi {58F182C7-EE11-4A5B-889B-B07819ABFEF1}

Scales Credit Iron Ore 2008 ?

{964BB2CA-99EA-47B0-A0ED-ADA91C661BE3}

Tar Credit Bitumen at refinery GaBi 2011 EU-27 {6304E047-E197-49BA-A63C-ADFAEC29106E} 1,8

Used Oil Credit Thermal energy from light fuel oil (LFO) GaBi 2011 EU-27

{261369F8-8AD9-4CAC-81BC-4F308F2D80BE} 1,8

Zinc Credit Zinc mix GaBi 2012 GLO {7DA4F1AD-4E3D-49E2-8A93-CCF349F45D57} 1,5

Ammonium Sulphate Credit Ammonium sulphate mix (by-product) GaBi 2013 DE

{1D5F9DA1-CEBC-4953-8E6A-DB80D8A3E680} 1,5

Sulphuric Acid Credit Sulphuric acid (96%) GaBi 2012 EU-27

{BF9C0154-1389-4F19-BCC1-15AEC086624E} 1,8

Used oil Credit Thermal energy from light fuel oil (LFO) GaBi 2011 EU-27

{261369F8-8AD9-4CAC-81BC-4F308F2D80BE} 1,8

(C) Coke Making (new) worldsteel {4833D0D1-7F71-4B83-B3E4-7683D5DE38DE}

CO Gas Flaring Master Process (new) worldsteel {248500C4-D169-4D72-A642-78413E62321D}

(D1) Sinter (new) worldsteel {ACFCD6E6-86E6-4C31-A132-5223E6E9DB0F}

(D2) Pellet Plant (new) worldsteel {15DCF232-AD86-4520-A052-903F04FA5F1D}

(F1) Blast Furnace (new) worldsteel {4E877F9B-D7B8-40F7-BF37-8407F3008B48}

BF Gas Flaring Master Process (new) worldsteel {45C147A3-A7A5-49C8-BBA2-B609F750C9E6}

(G1) BOF Steel Making (new) worldsteel {F4EA4D9D-4AA4-4E3A-8BF7-646ABC6F376B}

BOF Gas Flaring Master Process (new) worldsteel {81699AF5-0523-49B6-A7F0-8C8E0D8A3714}

(H) Hot Strip Mill (new) worldsteel {6DE018F6-10D2-4FF3-92C3-DFDC208077C4}

(L) Pickling (new) worldsteel {9AED6708-9FF0-4A98-9D50-F6240E7CFAA7}

153

(O) Cold Rolling (new) worldsteel {A2B140A3-056F-4782-B225-562CA1929BD6}

(R) Hot-dip Galvanising (new) worldsteel {F2854CEF-CC54-4305-B94B-B9F409915D50}

Boiler I (new) worldsteel {063D5F89-4A9A-4DD9-AB2B-5454A12509BA}

In case your company faces situation 3 for the main important background datasets (as they are usually not directly under the control of the metal sheet producer) high quality industry average datasets should be used. Considering the usual multiple origins of the metal supply to sheet production plant, the metal industry considers that industry averaged datasets are the most accurate and representative of current production and metal supply practices. These Industry averaged datasets are externally reviewed and are regularly updated by industry associations, thereby ensuring that datasets are the most up-to-date, accurate and representative of the current market situation. However, if those processes are under the control of the metal sheet producer and if the metal supply for the metal sheet production is issued from those processes, specific company data may be used instead.

Industry averaged datasets are available from the following sources:



European Lead Sheet Industry Association (ELA): Life Cycle Assessment Report of Lead Sheet, May 2014



A more detailed list provides Table 12-33.

154

Table 12-33: datasets to be used for main important background data

Material/ Process Dataset name Primary source

Year Geographical reference

GUID DQR (GaBi)

DQR criteria

Aluminium

Manufacturing

Aluminium Aluminium ingot mix (2010) PE/EAA 2012/2010 EU-27 {05F94D68-6435-4312-9AE2-091ABADC5B24}

1,4

Secondary Aluminium

Aluminium recycling (2010) PE/EAA 2012/2010 EU-27 {EE5C6B93-B51F-4257-80B5-E51DA2B226F3}

1,4

End-of-life stage

Aluminium recycling Aluminium recycling (2010) PE/EAA 2012/2010 EU-27 {EE5C6B93-B51F-4257-80B5-E51DA2B226F3}

1,4

Landfill Landfill for inert matter (Aluminium) PE 2012 EU-27 {2BB26C32-23C1-459D-929D-F07917830678}

1,4

Copper

Manufacturing

Copper Primary copper cathode PE/ICA/ECI 2012/2005 EU-27 {2B8627D2-C668-46B5-8320-A352024CA25D}

1,5

Secondary Copper Secondary copper cathode PE/ICA/ECI 2012/2005 EU-27 {41AB5B10-00F6-4976-A289-496C0F0E7922}

1,5

End-of-life stage

Landfill Landfill for inert matter (Copper) PE 2012 EU-27 1,4

Lead

Manufacturing

Lead Primary lead mix PE/ILZRO 2012/2008/09 EU-27 1,5

Secondary Lead Secondary lead mix PE/ILZRO 2012/2008/09 EU-27 {148C58A8-D69B-488D-9FC7-39074050ADA5}

1,5

End-of-life stage

155

Lead recycling Refining of lead sheet scrap PE/ELSIA 2012/2013 EU-27 1,4

Landfill Landfill for inert matter (Lead) PE 2012 EU-27 1,4

Steel

Manufacturing

Steel (Theoretical) Primary steel slab PE/worldsteel 2008 EU-27 1,8

Secondary steel Secondary steel slab PE/worldsteel 2008 EU-27 1,8

End-of-life stage

Steel recycling Secondary steel slab PE/worldsteel 2008 EU-27 1,8

Landfill Landfill for inert matter (Steel) PE 2012 EU-27 {05958C80-8334-436B-BE65-346AB4C83D39}

1,4

156

The following chapter provide some more information on these industry data.

12.12.1 Metal production and recycling datasets

For processes in the supply chain that are not directly under the control of the metal sheet producer (such as mining and concentration, smelting and in some cases refining) it is necessary to use representative datasets instead of specific primary data. In such cases, even if EV poses a significant contribution, it is necessary to use market-representative data to compensate the missing specific data. This is also applicable for Erecycled. Industry averaged datasets shall be preferred to literature based unit processes.

Industry averaged datasets are available from the following sources:



European Lead Sheet Industry Association (ELSIA): Life Cycle Assessment Report of Lead Sheet, May 2014



Additional information on metal industry averaged datasets:

Aluminium

Average unit-process data is published by the European Aluminium Association within the Environmental Profile Report for the European Aluminium Industry. High quality industry data, including process synergies, efficiencies, losses and yields have been collected. These company-individual data are consolidated and those representative averages are modelled in the LCA calculations. Mining, electrolyse (Electricity production is particularly critical for the electrolysis step), cast house, rolling process, transport (Recycling) As much as possible, allocation has been avoided. Each LCI dataset includes aluminium scrap and dross recycling so that the only valuable material exiting the product system is aluminium sheet. Any further details are described in the EAA Environmental Profile Report for the European Aluminium Industry, April 2013.

Lead

Lead: LCI of Primary and Secondary Lead production and the Life Cycle Assessment of Lead Sheet.

Steel

Steel: Life Cycle Inventory has been taken by authorization of worldsteel and representatives of the steel industry, from the LCA Methodology report. The worldsteel Life Cycle Inventory has been designed on vertical averaging per product group. This approach was chosen in order to harmonise and cope with the multitude of process set-ups co-existing in the industry, with different physical interlinks (e.g. of process gases) internally between individual process steps or externally.

157

Copper

Unit process data is confidential and cannot be disclosed to the public. It is the responsibility of the association to collect high quality primary data from industry, including process synergies, efficiencies, losses and yields. These company-individual data are modelled individually in the LCA database and consolidated into an aggregated data set that reflects a representative market mix. Currently only environmental-profiles for semi-products are published.

12.12.2 Other background datasets

The other background datasets used in the LCA model to generate the LCI of metal sheet shall be transparently listed in the PEF documentation. In addition, for the background datasets contributing significantly to the results, e.g. electricity data, their selection shall be justified in the PEF documentation. A list of exemplary datasets can be obtained from the GaBi 6 database and should be listed like the following generic nomenclature:

“Country Code”: “Name”, “GUID {..}”, “reference year”

158

12.13 ANNEX XIII – EOL FORUMLAS

The baseline recycling equation (Annex V) as required by the PEF Guide [PEF Guide 2013/179/EU] has to be applied. However, the metal industry considers that the integrated equation is a more adequate equation than the default equation proposed in the PEF guide. Hence, the TS recommends to apply also the integrated equation for cradle to grave environmental footprinting and its modular version (module D equation) for cases where the results need to be decomposed into various life cycle stages, such as in the case of an intermediate product. Consequently this results in three different formulas to be applied in the context of this PEFCR.

159

12.14 ANNEX XIV – BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON METHODOLOGICAL

CHOICES TAKEN DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PEFCR

1. System boundaries – life-cycle stages and processes

Figure 12-7: Product flow sheet and system boundaries

The Production stage (red dotted area) and EoL stage (blue dotted as a mandatory additional environmental information) are included in the PEFCR for metal sheets. The use stage (fabrication of final product, use stage and demolition incl. transport processes) is not considered in this PEFCR and shall be covered by a specific PEFCR for the metal sheet application, due to the fact that metal sheets are intermediate products and can be used for the manufacture of end-use products for various applications. Exploration and identification of reserves of natural resources have been excluded from the Screening Study used to develop this PEFCR (see below). The impact of the use stage of a metal sheet is unknown and excluded from this PEFCR. Specifications for use by Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM), architects and other designers of the final applications can vary according to the type of application (and also within each specific application). Therefore it would be necessary to define the exact conditions of downstream applications, when evaluating the use-stage of the sheets.

160

Figure 12-7 describes the generic metal sheet production route. This generic flow-diagram includes a metal supply based on primary production, on recycling or on a mix of both sourcing. Primary production requires exploration, mining, beneficiation, hydro- or pyrometallurgical processing followed by melting and/or casting, rolling and finishing. Secondary production requires collection of waste and recycling.

The metal sheet collected at end of life enters the scrap pool. The scrap pool will comprise metallic scrap generated from many life cycles of the same metal. The end of life scrap (post-consumer scrap) is then recycled into secondary metal. This metal can subsequently be used in the manufacture products (for use in the same application that generated the scrap, or for use in new applications). The scrap pool comprises not only post-consumer scrap from various product life cycles but also process scrap generated during the fabrication stage. Similarly, the scrap pool is used as a secondary material source by various product life cycles of the same metal. The concept of scrap pool is further detailed below in this Annex under 5. Guidance for determining equation parameters. .

Depending on the metal sheet and the purity of the metal scrap (i.e. secondary material), recycling may follow the different routes represented by the blue dotted line in Figure 12-7. Recycling of secondary material can be a stand-alone production process or can be performed in conjunction with the primary production process, covering additional upstream operations such as scrap collection and sorting. The red-dotted line encompasses the scope of the PEFCR. The rolling mill and finishing step can be regarded as the core process (foreground system) to manufacture a metal sheet from virgin and / or secondary material. In specific cases, e.g. continuous strip casting process, this core process may also include melting and/or casting. For the upstream metallurgical processes, there is a solid data basis provided by the commodity association based on representative and robust industry averaged LCI datasets which are usually third party reviewed. See section 5.2.

For the core process (rolling and finishing which includes in some cases melting and casting before the rolling process) primary data shall be collected for a PEF, deviations from this are possible if justified.

Production stage

The production stage can include some or all of the following steps:

1. Raw material extraction, beneficiation and metallurgical treatment and primary material preparation (smelting and refining) including alloying. Casting of slab/ingot/billet/cathode (starting material for sheet production). This includes transportation.

2. Secondary material (i.e. scrap) preparation and recycling, metal melting/remelting including alloying. Casting of slab/ingot/billet/cathode (starting material for sheet production). This includes transportation. Transportation of the slab/billet/ingot/cathode to the sheet production site. Transport shall be considered. In some cases the ingot will be produced at the same site as that conducts sheet production, and in some cases this will be a fully automated process (e.g. lead sheet production).

3. Manufacturing, the transformation of ingots/slab/billet/cathode into the finished intermediate sheet, including rolling, direct casting and finishing processes. The life cycle model should loop back the Manufacturing scrap into the input side of the core process, including processes of treatment if necessary. This internal scrap loop should not be considered in the evaluation of R1.

Provision of all materials, products and energy, as well as waste processing up to the end-of waste state or disposal of final residues during the production stage are included in the system boundaries.

End of Life stage

161

Metal sheets are intermediate products and can be used for the manufacture of end-use products for various applications. The end-of-life stage of a metal sheet is determined from the conditions of the application and becomes a “module” to be used when developing PEFCRs for products further down that supply chain. This is equally applicable if the intermediate product can be used in different supply chains (e.g. metal sheets). Therefore the End of Life stage is considered as a mandatory additional environmental information that shall provide the environmental footprint for the EoL stage of the intermediate product based on a realistic and justified scenario (see chapter 4.6.).

Examples of end-of-life processes that shall, if applicable, be included are:

- The production of the secondary material, i.e. metal scrap, which usually includes

o Collection and transport of end-of-life products and packages;

o Dismantling of components; Shredding and sorting;

- The conversion of metal scrap into a recycled metal ingot, i.e. slab/billet/ingot/cathode. This usually includes melting/remelting, refining and casting and if needed metallurgical treatment.

This stage also includes transportation operations and provision of all materials, products and related energy and water use.

The scenarios for the End of Life stage of metal sheets (downstream scenarios) are described further in chapter 5.8.

Examples of individual commodities can be found in the Annex.

2. Rationale for considering the Toxicity and Resource depletion categories not sufficiently robust

Toxicity indicators

Toxicity indicators are highly uncertain and potentially misleading for metals for the following main reasons:

- The application of general toxicity criteria within the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) of metals, i.e. related to emissions of metal and metal compounds, currently poses significant methodological and scientific problems as stated in the specific ILCD handbook. For metals, the USEtox method does not consider some metal specificities (e.g. essentiality) or is highly uncertain regarding the model parameters related to the long term behaviour, i.e. ageing, due to the permanent character of metals. Therefore, the USEtox characterization factors for metals are rated as interim in the USEtox website and should then only be used with caution and not for product comparison purposes.

- For toxicity assessment, several thousands of substances are contributing to the LCIA indicators. Therefore, the toxicity indicators are highly sensitive to the degree of completeness of the LCI datasets not only for the foreground processes but also for all the background processes. Today, the level of completeness of the various LCI datasets is not sufficiently homogeneous to secure robust and non-discriminatory results.

- PEF normalisation factors are currently based on domestic European production. It is acknowledged that these normalisation factor are largely underestimated compared to normalisation factors which should be based on the European consumption market. Such underestimation is particularly significant for toxicity and resource depletion which highly result from imports. As a consequence, the contribution of the normalised USEtox indicators is largely overestimated due to this inadequate choice of PEF normalisation factors.

162

The above limitations demonstrate the lack of robustness of the toxicity indicators which are then considered as non-robust.

Resource depletion

There is a significant lack of agreement around what is the right method to use to measure depletion of natural resources. The CML 2002 method uses the term “reserves” for what are defined as “resources” by the USGS and industry. Whereas the total stock of elements is assumed to be fixed, mineral resource and reserve data are constantly changing due to market prices and production costs.

The role of exploration is neglected in ADP, yet it continually over-compensates for depletion of reserves and therefore has a dramatic influence on CML 2002 results (see also Tilton & Lagos, 2007). For example, in the early 1970’s Copper resources were estimated at 1.6 billion tonnes by the USGS. This data was then updated to 3.7 billion tonnes in 2006 (Edelstein, 2006) and is now estimated at 5.6 billion tonnes (Johnson et al., 2014). As a result, short-term socio-economic aspects are clearly dominating the CML 2002 evaluation in comparison to environmental aspects and the results are therefore unstable. Additionally, reserve data of some materials are disproportionately low because there is currently little incentive for exploration (e.g., lead, mercury, vanadium, which are frequently highlighted by CML 2002 in LCA). In developing these PEFCR, a Screening Study also determined that CML 2002 exacerbates metal depletion potential in comparison to fossil based depletion - potentially leading to unjustified material preference. Finally, USGS estimates of the Reserve Base were discontinued in 2009, meaning that all current ADP characterization factors recommended in the PEF Guidance remain fixed to 2009 or earlier and are therefore unusable (UNEP, 2011).

Thus Reserve estimates are poor candidates for understanding the potential impact of a product system on the natural resource and their use produces results that cannot be comparable. Van Oers et al. pointed this out themselves in their 2002 paper, “The disadvantage of the ‘reserve base’ and ‘economic reserve’ is that the estimate of the size of the reserve involves a variety of respectively technical and economic considerations not directly related to the environmental problem of resource depletion.”

As a result, the ADP indicator specified in the PEF Guidance is not built upon an ISO-compliant “environmental mechanism”, is highly uncertain and lacks robustness and reproducibility. There is international consensus that the resource depletion Area of Protection needs to be redefined. Using out-of-date estimates of highly unstable indicators to estimate impacts to an Area of Protection that experts agree is not correct would contravene the PEF Guidance’s own overriding principles. The ADP indicator is therefore deemed inappropriate and not robust for PEF.

For ADP, the TS strongly recommends the user of this PEFCR to not only apply the “Reserve Base” baseline approach (as required in the PEF guidance), but to also test the “ultimate reserve” baseline as an alternative. The “Reserve Base” refers to the method/baseline “Resource Depletion, fossil and mineral, reserve base CML 2002” and the “Ultimate Reserve” refers to the method/baseline “CML 2001 – Dec. 07, Abiotic Depletion (ADP)”.

3. Additional environmental information

As described in section 5.8 and below, the metal industry recommends the use of the integrated equation for “cradle to grave” environmental footprinting and its modular version (i.e. also referred to as the module D equation) for other cases where the results need to be decomposed into various life cycle stages (e.g. construction applications). Whilst both equations provide the same overall result from a “cradle to grave” perspective, the modular version reflects the contribution of the various life stages to such overall result in a more appropriate manner. The results of the PEF pilot project on

163

metal sheet are decomposed into two life cycle stages: the production stage of the intermediate product and the mandatory additional information resulting from the end of life stage. Therefore, the modular version of the integrated equation is the recommended equation in this PEF pilot project.

As a result, the end of life stage of the metal sheet is addressed through mandatory additional environmental information on end-of-life recycling which constitutes an essential element of its PEF profile. This complementary information is essential and mandatory for creating any PEF on a final metal product.

4. The integrated equation (IE)

The integrated equation (IE)

The metals industry has explored a range of methods for modelling recycling. The metals industry believe that the most appropriate method is the one proposed by Marc-Andree Wolf et al (maki Consulting, see /MAKI 1/ & /MAKI 2/), called the “Integrated approach”. This is considered as the most appropriate method as it allows the proper reflection of the end of life stage whilst also allowing reflection of complex recycling situations. This approach and formula is a development of the original International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook and is fully in line with the ISO requirements for LCA (ISO 14044). It reflects physical reality, considers down-cycling effects on the quantity and quality of recycled material, in addition to taking into account energy recovery appropriately. This integrated equation is expressed as follows:

IE = (1 - R1) 𝗑 EV + R1 𝗑 QSin/QPin 𝗑 E§V + R2 𝗑 (ErecyclingEoL – E*

V 𝗑 QS/QP) + R3 𝗑 (EER - LHV 𝗑 XER,elec 𝗑 ESE,elec – LHV 𝗑 XER, heat 𝗑 ESE,heat) + (1 – R2 – R3 ) 𝗑 ED)

Compared to the default Annex V equation (see Annex V in /PEF Guide 2013/179/EU/), the following terms have been added:

Term Unit, restrictions

Definition

E§V Various, per kg

primary material Resources consumed/emissions for the acquisition of the virgin material substituted by the recycled material that is used as recycled content for the analysed product

Qs/QP

QSin/QPin

[Dimensionless], (0 ≤ Qs/QP ≤ 1)

Crediting (EoL stage) and debiting (production stage) correction factor: Ratio reflecting the possible differences between the recycled material and the primary material.

The correction factor is hence either a quantitative substitution factor, qualitative technical usability factor (technical downcycling) or market-supply-and-demand driven factor. The choice of the factor is outside the Integrated formula, while it needs to be defined coherently across all materials and must be identical for crediting (Qs/QP) and debiting (QSin/QPin) of the same material.

164

A detailed analysis of the integrated equation is provided in the White Paper available via the Maki Consulting website11. When several recycling routes are used at the end of life stage (see section 5.9),

the term “R2 𝗑 (ErecyclingEoL – E*V 𝗑 QS/QP)” shall be decomposed accordingly.

Integrated equation in its modular form (MIE)

The metal industry recommends using the modular version of the integrated equation when the results are decomposed into various life cycle stages. The modular version of the integrated equation better reflects the environmental aspects associated respectively to the production stage and end of life stage. Indeed, the modular form of the integrated equation allows assessing at production stage the environmental impact of material acquisition on basis of the metal sourcing while at the end of life stage, the additional environmental aspects resulting from that stage are calculated. This modular version is easily derived from the integrated equation by adding and removing simultaneously the

term “R1 𝗑 Erecycled”. Hence, the modular version is expressed as follows:

MIE = (1 - R1) 𝗑 EV + R1 𝗑 Erecycled + [R2 𝗑 (ErecyclingEoL – E*V 𝗑 QS/QP) - R1 (Erecycled - QSin/QPin 𝗑 E§

V )] + R3 𝗑 (EER - LHV 𝗑 XER,elec 𝗑 ESE,elec – LHV 𝗑 XER, heat 𝗑 ESE,heat) + (1 – R2 – R3 ) 𝗑 ED)

Within this integrated equation in its modular form,

- the term “(1 - R1) 𝗑 EV + R1 𝗑 Erecycled “ represents the burdens for the material acquisition

at the production stage

- the term “[R2 𝗑 (ErecyclingEoL – E*V 𝗑 QS/QP) - R1 (Erecycled - QSin/QPin 𝗑 E§

V )]” represents

the additional burdens and benefits resulting from the end of life recycling (first part) considering the recycling burdens and benefits already considered at the production level (second part).

While both equations provide the same overall result from a “cradle to grave” perspective, the modular version more appropriately reflects the contribution of the various life stages to such overall result. For the PEF pilot project on metal sheet, results are decomposed into two life cycle stages: the production stage of the intermediate product and the mandatory additional information (i.e. the end of life stage). Hence, the modular version of the integrated equation is then the most adequate equation in this PEF pilot project.

When several recycling routes are used at the production stage or end of life stage, the terms related to R1 and R2 shall be decomposed accordingly (see further below for details about the calculation of the different parameters).

Integrated Equation in its modular form and “module D” equation

In the building sector, EN15804 is used to communicate environmental information on building products through environmental product declarations (EPDs). EN15804 has a number of modules that shall be used to model the life cycle. Similarly to the modular integrated equation, the module D in EN 15804 is used to reflect the additional environmental aspects resulting from recycling and energy recovery at the end of life stage. The overall approach of EN15804 including module D is similar to the modular integrated equation. A “module D” equation has been developed in the PEF context in order to reflect the EN15804 approach in term of material acquisition and end of life treatment. This module

11http://maki-consulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/White-paper-Integrated-

approach_Wolf&Chomkhamsri2014_Final.pdf

165

D equation has been provided to the EF construction platform and the pilot projects referring to products used in the construction sectors have been invited to test it.

The module D equation is expressed as follows:

Production: Module A1-A3:

End of life

In practice, there is a full equivalence between the Integrated Equation in its modular form (MIE) and the module D equation proposed to be used by the PEF pilot project in the construction sector. An example of calculation with the modular integrated equation is given in section 6 at the end of such Annex XIV.

It should be noted that the various modules in EN15804 shall not be added up in one figure. In addition, the product system boundaries defined under EN15804 in some cases may require additional information along the recycling value chain.

5. Guidance for determining equation parameters

Reflecting adequately the recycling situation of metal sheet is crucial to assess its PEF profile. Indeed, when a metal product reaches the end of its life, it is sometimes reused but in most cases it is recycled. Hence, most metal products at end-of-life are collected for recycling. For example, currently more than 95% of the metal products used in buildings are collected and recycled.

- Scrap pool concept

Before being recycled at end of life, metal products are often pre-processed into sorted metal scrap. This scrap metal enters the “scrap pool”-a concept for the metallic scrap that is available for recycling into secondary metal (as defined in the terms and glossary). Depending on the origin of the scrap, operations such as shredding, sorting and cleaning may be required before recycling can be conducted. (scrap preparation) These processes generate scrap which satisfies specific composition criteria which are typically classified in various scrap categories or codes12. Hence, the scrap pool can be composed of various categories of scrap. For the sake of simplicity figure 12-7 depicts the scrap preparation operations taking place downstream of the scrap pool. However, this is just an illustrative example and not indicative of all practices.

In addition to end of life scrap (post-consumer scrap), several production routes of metals products can generates production scrap (also referred to as process scrap). For example, fabricating a metal casing for a PC from a metal sheet generates some scrap from cutting and machining operations. This fabrication scrap is considered as process scrap and will be recycled for producing new metal sheet or

12 Scrap Specifications Circular 2015 - Guidelines for Nonferrous Scrap, Ferrous Scrap, Glass Cullet, Paper Stock,

Plastic Scrap, Electronics Scrap, Tire Scrap; EFFECTIVE 15 Jan 2015, ISRI, http://www.isri.org/

Module C3 :

Module D :

recycledV ERER 111

elecSEelecERheatSEheatERRE

P

inSinVrecycled

P

outSoutVEoLrecycling

D

EXLHVEXLHVER

Q

QEER

Q

QEER

ERR

,,,,3

,,

*

1

,,

*

,2

321

http://www.isri.org/

166

other metal products. Both process scrap and post-consumer scrap are considered as secondary material sources for producing metal sheets.

The quality of the scrap type can affect the values of R1 and Erecycled. For example, recycling of lower grade scrap may have a lower recycling yield, and require additional recycling processes that the recycling of higher grade scrap. Similarly, lower quality scrap may require smelting and refining stages to produce a high quality ingot, whereas higher quality scrap may only require refining. This means that in the case of lower grade recycling there may be some material losses along the recycling chain. The result of this is that the recycling of low grade scrap may in some cases result in lower primary metals savings. It is therefore important that the types of scrap used at production stage and generated at end of life are properly considered as this will affect respectively R1 and Erecycled for the production stage and R2 and ErecyclingEoL for the end of life stage.

It should also be noted that the quality factor of the recycled metal ingot should not be directly correlated to or derived from the grade of the scrap category or code from which the recycled metal originates. In most cases, recycling is undertaken to ensure that the recycled metal has the same physical and chemical properties to that of the primary metal.

An example of calculation is given in section 6 at the end of such Annex XIV.

The integrated equation under its modular form (MIE)

The integrated equation in it modular form uses a range of terms and parameters as reported in the following table:

Integrated equation in its modular form

Cradle to gate (material acquisition)

(1 - R1) 𝗑 EV + R1 𝗑 Erecycled

Mandatory additional environmental information (end of life stage)

[R2 𝗑 (ErecyclingEoL – E*V 𝗑 QS/QP) - R1 (Erecycled - QSin/QPin 𝗑 E§

V )]

+ R3 𝗑 (EER - LHV 𝗑 XER,elec 𝗑 ESE,elec – LHV 𝗑 XER, heat 𝗑 ESE,heat)

+ (1 – R2 – R3 ) 𝗑 ED)

These various terms can be explained on basis of the following metal flow diagram.

167

Figure 12-8: Illustration of the metal mass flow and system boundaries for the various terms used in the modular version of the integrated recycling equation for 1kg of metal sheet

Defining the metal mass flow

In order to provide clarity on what is included or excluded from the terms described in the recycling formula, Figure 12-7 provides an example of metal flows and helps define R1 and R2 and clarify the connection with the scrap pool. For the purposes of illustration, the unit of analysis is 1kg, which can be taken to be fulfilling the functional unit of 1m² of metal sheet. The diagram provides a generic and conceptual overview for all metals, describing all possible levels of processing applicable to metal scrap. In general, metal scrap does not require all levels of processing as illustrated in the diagram. In practice melting & casting of clean scrap, secondary metal and primary metals, which are assigned to different system boundaries can take place simultaneously, in the same technological unit.

The system boundaries for Erecycled and ErecyclingEoL may vary according to the metal and the recycling processes used. The system boundary for Erecycled is defined by the point of substitution after melting and casting of the slab (for steel and aluminium) and after refining of the cathode /ingot for copper and lead.

The numbers presented, are purely theoretical and not to be used as default values. Sector average figures are presented in Annex II. In the example presented, 0.33 kg of scrap is taken from the scrap pool, as secondary material sourcing. This scrap is then processed and cast into a shape suitable for further processing i.e. slab, ingot or billet or into a cathode in case of electrolytic refining. At this point the metal comprises 30% recycled metal and 70% primary metal. On further processing into a sheet, the metal may generate process scrap (e.g. 0.2 kg yield loss) that is returned to the melting and casting

168

process. This process scrap does not contribute to R1 because it is circulating within the product system boundary and the scrap does not come from outside the system. This diagram can be considered as a simplification of reality and in some cases, metal scrap may not require the same level of processing as illustrated in the diagram.

In addition, some metal losses, e.g. 1-2%, may occur at the rolling process and the associated remelting of process scrap. Hence, the metal flow at the materai lacquisition level may be slightly higher than the metal in the unit of analysis, i.e. the metla sheet. These aspecs are considered in the calculation reported at section 6 of such Annex XIV.

After use (end of life), metal sheet is collected and directed to recycling. After shredding and sorting, a quantity of 95 kg of metal scrap is provided to the scrap pool from which 0.9 kg of recycled metal is produced.

Figure 5.1 also illustrates the inclusion of potential yield losses when processing scrap, which can be assumed to go to disposal.

“Cradle to gate” calculation

In the modular integrated equation, the material acquisition at production stage is calculated on basis

of the two respective material sourcing: the primary raw material fraction ((1 - R1) 𝗑 EV) and the

recycled material (secondary) fraction (R1 𝗑 Erecycled). As detailed in the previous section on “scrap

pool” it is important that R1 and Erecycled consider properly the category or the code of the scrap which is used.

Material acquisition is part of the “cradle to gate” information.

Calculating the mandatory additional environmental information

All other terms of the equation correspond to the end of life stage and are part of the “Mandatory additional environmental information”

The first part of the equation relates to the additional contribution of recycling at end of life.

The benefits resulting from end of life recycling are calculated from the quantity of material which is recycled at end of life R2, which is multiplied by a combination of two terms:

- “ErecyclingEoL” which corresponds to the environmental burdens of the end of life recycling up to the point of substitution, i.e. the point where the recycled material substitutes primary material.

- “– E*V 𝗑 QS/QP” which corresponds to the environmental benefits, (reflected as a negative

number in the formula) resulting from the primary material which is substituted by recycled material. The substitution of primary material by secondary material is modelled using a quality factor that considers the possible loss of inherent properties between the recycled material and the primary material. This is explained further in this section.

To ensure consistency, the above calculation also need to be been performed at the production stage as well. This assesses the environmental debits associated with the production stage, in contrast to the environmental credit at end of life. In this case, the recycled content (R1) is multiplied by a combination of two terms:

- “- Erecycled” which corresponds to the environmental credits of the recycling (which have been already considered) up to the point of substitution, i.e. the point where recycled material substitutes primary material.

- “+ E§V 𝗑 QSin/QPin” which corresponds to the environmental burdens of the primary

materials which are saved through the use of recycled material, using a quality factor for

169

considering the possible loss of inherent properties between the recycled material and the primary material.

Calculating Erecycled and ErecyclingEoL

The environmental burdens of the recycling processes shall consider all recycling operations up to the point of substitution. The point of substitution can be defined as the point at which recycled material effectively substitutes primary material. In the case of metals, these recycling operations involve transforming metallic scrap (of varying composition) into metallic ingot, slab or billet of specified purity and composition with well-defined properties. These recycling operations can include smelting, refining, melting and alloying processes. For metal sheet, the point of substitution can be defined at different places of the production chain. For aluminium and steel sheet the point of substitution is at slab or billet, which is usually the starting material for sheet production. The point of substitution for copper and lead sheet is after refining the metal ( to copper cathode or lead ingot) and prior to melting and casting of a shape (slab/billet). In the case of reuse of metallic sheet, the substitution can occur downstream of the slab/billet level.

In the PEF communication, the point(s) of substitution shall be explicitly defined and justified. Erecycled and ErecyclingEoL shall then consider accordingly all the burdens of the recycling processes up to their respective point of substitution. In addition, the reference flow used in Erecycled and ErecyclingEoL shall be the recycled material which is effectively produced at the point of substitution, i.e. considering all the losses taking place in the upstream recycling processes.

Calculating R1 and R2

The recycled content (R1) or the end of recycling rate (R2) shall be defined at their respective point of substitution which has been defined.

The recycled content in the metal sheet, i.e. R1, represents the fraction of metal manufactured from secondary metal at the point of substitution. R1 shall be calculated according to ISO14021 and shall exclude any process scrap produced upstream (i.e. any scrap generated at the sheet production step). Process scrap generated at sheet production step level shall be clearly excluded from R1 calculation. The LCA modelling shall take into account such internal scrap flow in an adequate manner.

For R1, preference shall be given to specific values provided by the metal sheet manufacturer. When no specific values are available, semi-specific values (i.e. specific to a product type) shall be preferred to a generic value. In all cases, the determination of the R1 value shall be justified and documented.

In Figure 12.7, R1 is 30% (i.e. 0,3 kg of a 1 kg of total metal comes from recycled metal).

Similarly, the end of life recycling rate, i.e. R2, shall be calculated at the point of substitution.

For R2, preference shall be given to specific values provided by the metal sheet manufacturer. Specific values shall be assessed at the point of substitution. This specific value shall be based on a realistic and justified end of life scenario using current end of life recycling practices. When no specific values are available, semi-specific value, i.e. specific to a product type, shall be preferred to a generic value. In all cases, the determination of R2 shall be justified and documented.

In Figure 12.7, R2 is 90% (i.e. at the point of substitution 0,9 kg total metal weight of 1 kg comes from recycled material.

Calculating E*V and E§

V

170

Similarly, E*V and E§

V shall consider all the environmental burdens of primary metal production up to

the defined points of substitution. The choice of the LCI datasets representing E*V and E§

V shall be justified and documented.

Calculating QS/QP and QSin/QPin

The quality ratio QS/QP (or QSin/QPin) aims at considering the loss of inherent properties of the recycled material compared to primary material. This ratio shall be assessed at the point of substitution.

The inherent properties of metals are usually fully restored through recycling, i.e. typically through melting, refining and solidification. Metals remain metals, even after having passed through many recycling loops, because metallic bonds are restored upon solidification. Recycled metals and alloys from metal sheet then keep the same properties as the original metal sheet. Hence, in most cases, the quality is fully maintained through recycling and the quality ratio stays equal to one at the point of substitution, e.g. an ingot, slab or billet made from recycled metal has the same properties as an ingot made from primary metal. Hence, the metal industry recommends using a quality ratio of one as default value which is representative of most recycling cases.

In specific cases, e.g. when end of life treatment does not follow the optimal recycling route, the quality factor may be affected and a value of less than one may be used. This may happen when some inherent properties of the metal are irreversibly affected by an inadequate end of life treatment and therefore cannot be fully restored through the recycling process.

For some highly alloyed metal products (e.g. some aluminium cast products may contain higher percentages of other metals such as silicon) the recycling process may require addition or mixing of pure primary metal or specific refining process in order to produce the required alloy specification of the product.

This PEFCR covers only pure metals (i.e. lead and copper, typically >99%) or low alloyed metal sheet (i.e. aluminium and steel) as defined in the section “4.1 Unit of Analysis”. The production of metals that require any significant mixing or addition of primary material process during recycling is not considered a significant issue for metal sheets and therefore not covered by this PEFCR.

In those specific cases, ISO14044 recommends using the most relevant physical or mechanical property to assess the loss of quality between recycled material and primary material. If not possible, the economic value may be used as a proxy. In any case, the calculation of the quality ratio shall be always justified and explained.

Calculating R3 and the contribution of energy recovery

According to best practices, metal sheet should not be directed to incinerators but should be directed to a recycling route. Except in the case of thin aluminium sheet, metals sheet do not contribute to energy recovery at end of life. Hence, R3 should be equal to 0 in most cases. If a metal sheet is incinerated at end of life, the end of life scenario should consider that metal may still be recovered and recycled from bottom ashes of the incinerator. The determination of R2 shall adequately consider such option.

Disposal

The fraction of the metal sheet which is not reused or recycled is then disposed and the corresponding emissions shall be modelled.

171

6. Examples of calculation

The two following table reports an example of calculation with fictive values for the 3 relevant equations, i.e. Annex V equation, the integrated equation and the modular integrated equation. In the first case, no metla losses are supposed in the rolling process while in the second case 2% of losses are assumed. It should be noted that the impact of the sheet production are not part of the equations.

Detailed formula

Annex V

Integrated Formula

Modular integrated Formula

*13

2,,,,3

*211

221

2221 DDelecSEelecERheatSEheatERER

P

SVoLrecyclingErecycledV E

RER

REXLHVEXLHVER

Q

QEE

RE

RE

R

172

Calculation without metal losses at metal sheet production

FormulaMaterial

AcquisitionEoL Total

Annex V 3,50 -1,8725 1,63

Integrated

equation 4,500 -3,795 0,705

Modular

Integraed

equation

2,500 -1,795 0,705

Parameters for calculation

Parameters Values Units Comments

m virgin material, acquisition 1,00 kg Mass of total input including losses per unit of analysis

m unit of analysis 1,00 kg Unit of analysis, product weight

4,5 Unit Fictive value for Environmental Profile of primary metal

Ev 4,5 Unit

specific emissions and resources consumed (per unit of analysis) arising from virgin

material (i.e. virgin material acquisition and pre-processing)

Ev* 4,5 Unit

specific emissions and resources consumed (per unit of analysis) arising from the

acquisition and pre-processing of virgin material assumed to be substituted by

recyclable materials

Ev§ 4,5 Unit

Resources consumed/emissions for the acquisition of the virgin material substituted

by the recycled material that is used as recycled content for the analysed product

R1 0,5 recycled (or reused) content of material

R2 0,95 recycling (or reuse) fraction of material at the end-of life

R3 0

Qs/Qp 1 Correction factors/Quality indicators

Erecycled 0,50 Unit


recycling processes of the secondary material (or reused) material, including

collection, sorting, transportation. For the copper sheet this is the emission profile of

the mix of secondary copper cathode and clean scrap direcly used for sheet production

( transformation of copper products at the end of life to copper scrap i.e collection,

sorting and mechanical pre-treatment )

ErecyclingEoL 0,50 Unit


recycling processes at the end-of-life stage, including collection, sorting,

transportation . For the copper sheet this is the emission profile related to the clean

scrap ( transformation of copper products at the end of life to clen copper scrap i.e

collection, sorting and mechanical pre-treatment is currently considered as zero

impact)

Qsin/Qpin 1 Correction factors/Quality indicators

ED 0,1 Unit Disposal fraction

Environmental Profile of virgin

material ( per kg of material)

Parameter

formula

𝐸 = 𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙,𝑎 𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑒𝑑 𝐸𝑛 𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑒

𝐸 = 𝑎𝑠𝑠, 𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑖𝑠 𝐸𝑛 𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑒

𝐸 = 𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑎 𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐸𝑛 𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑎 𝑡

173

Calculation with 2% metal losses at metal sheet production

FormulaMaterial

AcquisitionEoL Total

Annex V 3,57 -1,8725 1,70

Integrated

equation 4,590 -3,795 0,795

Modular

Integraed

equation

2,550 -1,755 0,795

Parameters for calculation

Parameters Values Units Comments

m virgin material, acquisition 1,02 kg Mass of total input including losses per unit of analysis

m unit of analysis 1,00 kg Unit of analysis, product weight

4,50 Unit Fictive value for Environmental Profile of primary metal

Ev 4,59 Unit

specific emissions and resources consumed (per unit of analysis) arising from virgin

material (i.e. virgin material acquisition and pre-processing)

Ev* 4,50 Unit


acquisition and pre-processing of virgin material assumed to be substituted by

recyclable materials

Ev§ 4,59 Unit

Resources consumed/emissions for the acquisition of the virgin material substituted

by the recycled material that is used as recycled content for the analysed product

R1 0,5 recycled (or reused) content of material

R2 0,95 recycling (or reuse) fraction of material at the end-of life

R3 0

Qs/Qp 1 Correction factors/Quality indicators

Erecycled 0,51 Unit


recycling processes of the secondary material (or reused) material, including

collection, sorting, transportation. For the copper sheet this is the emission profile of

the mix of secondary copper cathode and clean scrap direcly used for sheet production

( transformation of copper products at the end of life to copper scrap i.e collection,

sorting and mechanical pre-treatment )

ErecyclingEoL 0,50 Unit


recycling processes at the end-of-life stage, including collection, sorting,

transportation . For the copper sheet this is the emission profile related to the clean

scrap ( transformation of copper products at the end of life to clen copper scrap i.e

collection, sorting and mechanical pre-treatment is currently considered as zero

impact)

Qsin/Qpin 1 Correction factors/Quality indicators

ED 0,1 Unit Disposal fraction

Environmental Profile of virgin

material ( per kg of material)

Parameter

formula

𝐸 = 𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙,𝑎 𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑒𝑑 𝐸𝑛 𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑒

𝐸 = 𝑎𝑠𝑠, 𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑖𝑠 𝐸𝑛 𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑒

𝐸 = 𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑎 𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐸𝑛 𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛 𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑎 𝑡

174

12.15 ANNEX XV – PCR REFERENCES

The following PCR documents were referenced while creating the PEFCR document

12.15.1 Building metals


NPCR013rev1 Steel as construction material

The Norwegian EPD foundation

Functional unit: kg

Basic Metals Environdec Functional unit: not specified

V1.5 Structural Steel Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V.

Functional unit: t

(Other declared units are allowed if the conversion to t is shown transparently.)

V1.5 Building metals Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V.

Functional unit: kg


V1.5 Products of aluminium and aluminium alloys


Functional unit: kg


175

12.15.2 Other applications


PCR 2002:01 Fabricated steel products, except construction

products and equipment

Environdec Functional unit: t

PN514 issue 0.0 Product Category Rules for Type III environmental product declaration of construction products to EN15804:2012

BRE Group Functional unit: Mass (1t) / Area (m²) / Length (m) / Volume (m³) / Item (piece)

(conversion factors shall be specified to calculate between the functional unit an the declared unit)

V1.5 Thin walled profiles and profiled panels of metal


Functional unit: m²

(If more suitable for the application of profiles the declared unit meter of profile may be used. The mass reference must be specified.)

PCR – 30/01/2013 Product Category Rules (PCR) for Aluminium Building Products

European Aluminium Association (www.alueurope.eu/updated-epd-programme-2/)

Depending on the product type: m2 for sheet products

176

12.16 ANNEX XVI – HOT-SPOTS

12.16.1 Aluminium

Table 12-34: Hotspots Acidification – Aluminium

Hotspots Acidification

Life cycle stages Virgin Material production (Raw material acquisition and pre-processing)

Processes Mining & Concentration

Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Sulphur dioxide and Nitrogen oxides in Mining & Concentration

Sulphur dioxide in Smelting & Refining

177

Table 12-35: Hotspots Ecotoxicity for aquatic freshwater – Aluminium

Hotspots Ecotoxicity for aquatic freshwater



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II), Nickel (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II), Nickel (+II) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-36: Hotspots Freshwater eutrophication – Aluminium

Hotspots Freshwater eutrophication



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Phosphorus in Mining & Concentration

Phosphorus, Phosphate in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-37: Hotspots IPCC global warming, excl. biogenic carbon – Aluminium

Hotspots IPCC global warming, excl. biogenic carbon



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Carbon dioxide in Mining & Concentration

Carbon dioxide in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-38: Hotspots Human toxicity (cancer) – Aluminium

Hotspots Human toxicity (cancer)


Processes Smelting & Refining

Mining & Concentration

Elementary flows Mercury (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Formaldehyde (methanal) in Smelting & Refining

178

Table 12-39: Hotspots Human toxicity (non-cancer) – Aluminium

Hotspots Human toxicity (non-cancer)



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Mercury (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-40: Hotspots Ionising radiation – Aluminium

Hotspots Ionising radiation



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Carbon (C14) in Mining & Concentration

Carbon (C14) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-41: Hotspots Marine eutrophication potential – Aluminium

Hotspots Marine eutrophication potential



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Nitrogen oxides in Mining & Concentration

Nitrogen oxides in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-42: Hotspots Ozone depletion – Aluminium

Hotspots Ozone depletion


Processes

Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows

R 114 (dichlorotetrafluoroethane) in Smelting & Refining

179

Table 12-43: Hotspots Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics – Aluminium

Hotspots Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Dust (PM2.5 - PM10), Sulphur dioxide in Mining & Concentration

Dust (PM2.5 - PM10), Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-44: Hotspots Photochemical ozone formation – Aluminium

Hotspots Photochemical ozone formation



Smelting & Refining


Sulphur dioxide and Nitrogen oxides in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-45: Hotspots Resource Depletion – Aluminium

Hotspots Resource Depletion



Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Bauxite in Mining & Concentration

Fluorspar (calcium fluoride; fluorite) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-46: Hotspots Terrestrial eutrophication – Aluminium

Hotspots Terrestrial eutrophication

Life cycle stages Virgin Material production (Raw material acquisition and pre-

processing) Production of the main product


Smelting & Refining



180

Table 12-47: Resource depletion - water – Aluminium

Resource depletion - water


Processes

Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Water (river water from technosphere. turbined), Water (river water) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-48: Hotspots Land use, Soil Organic Matter (SOM) – Aluminium

Hotspots Land use, Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

Life cycle stages

Rolling (Production of the main product)

Processes

Rolling

Elementary flows

From industrial area, To industrial area in Rolling in Rolling

12.16.2 Copper

Table 12-49: Hotspots Acidification – Copper




Smelting & Refining


Sulphur dioxide in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-50: Hotspots Ecotoxicity for aquatic freshwater - Copper




Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II) in Smelting & Refining

181

Table 12-51: Hotspots Freshwater eutrophication – Copper





Rolling

Elementary flows Phosphorus in Mining & Concentration

Phosphorus, Phosphate in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-52: Hotspots IPCC global warming, excl. biogenic carbon – Copper




Smelting & Refining



Table 12-53: Hotspots Human toxicity (cancer) – Copper




Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Chromium (+VI) in Mining & Concentration

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-54: Hotspots Human toxicity (non-cancer) – Copper




Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), Lead (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II) in Smelting & Refining

182

Table 12-55: Hotspots Ionising radiation – Copper





Smelting & Refining

Rolling



Carbon (C14) in Rolling

Table 12-56: Hotspots Marine eutrophication potential – Copper




Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate, Ammonium/ammonia in Mining & Concentration

Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-57: Hotspots Ozone depletion – Copper


Life cycle stages Secondary Material Production (Raw material acquisition and pre-processing)


Processes Rolling

Secondary material production

Elementary flows R 114 (dichlorotetrafluoroethane) in Rolling

R 114 (dichlorotetrafluoroethane) in Secondary material production

183

Table 12-58: Hotspots Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics – Copper



Secondary Material Production (Raw material acquisition and pre-processing)


Smelting & Refining

Secondary material production

Elementary flows Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5), Dust (PM2.5 - PM10) in Mining & Concentration

Dust (PM10), Dust (PM2.5) in Secondary material production

Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM10) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-59: Hotspots Photochemical ozone formation – Copper




Smelting & Refining


Sulphur dioxide and Nitrogen oxides in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-60: Hotspots Resource Depletion – Copper13



Processes

Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows

Vanadium in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-61: Hotspots Terrestrial eutrophication – Copper


13 Within the LCI of copper, copper ore is not characterised as a resource (meaning metal content in ore is not

specified). This limits the usability of the LCI data for the screening study. See also screening report [SCREENING

2015]. Vanadium is part of the catalyst of the acid sulphuric plant present at the smelter’s site. This dataset is

based on literature data and thereby represents only medium/low quality data based on expert judgement.

184

Life cycle stages Virgin Material production (Raw material acquisition and pre-

processing) Production of the main product


Smelting & Refining



Table 12-62: Resource depletion - water – Copper

Resource depletion - water


Processes


Elementary flows Water (river water from technosphere. turbined), Water (river water) in Mining & Concentration

Table 12-63: Hotspots Land use, Soil Organic Matter (SOM) – Copper


Life cycle stages


Processes

Rolling

Elementary flows

From grassland, To industrial area in Rolling

185

12.16.3 Lead

Table 12-64: Hotspots Acidification – Lead





Secondary Material Production


Sulphur dioxide in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-65: Hotspots Ecotoxicity for aquatic freshwater – Lead






Elementary flows Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Copper (+II), Arsenic (+V), Zinc (+II) in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-66: Hotspots Freshwater eutrophication – Lead






Elementary flows Phosphate in Mining & Concentration

Phosphorus in Secondary Material Production

186

Table 12-67: Hotspots IPCC global warming, excl. biogenic carbon – Lead





Smelting & Refining



Carbon dioxide in Secondary Material Production


Table 12-68: Hotspots Human toxicity (cancer) – Lead




Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Lead (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V), Lead (+II) in Smelting & Refining

Table 12-69: Hotspots Human toxicity (non-cancer) – Lead




Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), Lead (+II) in Mining & Concentration

Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), Lead (+II) in Smelting & Refining

187

Table 12-70: Hotspots Ionising radiation – Lead




Processes Secondary Material Production


Smelting & Refining



Carbon (C14)) in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-71: Hotspots Marine eutrophication potential – Lead






Elementary flows Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate in Mining & Concentration

Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate, Ammonium/ammonia in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-72: Hotspots Ozone depletion – Lead





Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows R 114 (dichlorotetrafluoroethane) in Smelting & Refining

R 114 (dichlorotetrafluoroethane) in Secondary material production

188

Table 12-73: Hotspots Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics – Lead






Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5), Nitrogen oxides in Mining & Concentration

Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5) in Smelting & Refining

Sulphur dioxide in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-74: Hotspots Photochemical ozone formation – Lead







Sulphur dioxide and Nitrogen oxides in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-75: Hotspots Resource Depletion – Lead



Processes

Smelting & Refining

Elementary flows

Silver, Lead in Smelting & Refining

189

Table 12-76: Hotspots Terrestrial eutrophication – Lead







Nitrogen oxides in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-77: Resource depletion - water – Lead

Resource depletion – water




Elementary flows Water (river water from technosphere. turbined), Water (river water) in Mining & Concentration

Water (river water from technosphere. turbined), Water (river water) in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-78: Hotspots Land use, Soil Organic Matter (SOM) – Lead


Life cycle stages


Processes

Rolling

Elementary flows

From industrial area and, To industrial area in Rolling

190

12.16.4 Steel

Table 12-79: Hotspots Acidification – Steel





Slab production

Elementary flows Sulphur dioxide and Nitrogen oxides in Slab production

Sulphur dioxide and Nitrogen oxides in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-80: Hotspots Ecotoxicity for aquatic freshwater – Steel




Processes Rolling

Slab production

Elementary flows Zinc (+II), Sulphuric Acid in Rolling

Zinc (+II) in Slab production

Table 12-81: Hotspots Freshwater eutrophication – Steel





Processes Rolling


Slab production

Elementary flows Phosphorus in Rolling

Phosphorus in Secondary Material Production

Phosphorus in Slab production

191

Table 12-82: Hotspots IPCC global warming, excl. biogenic carbon – Steel



Processes

Slab production

Elementary flows

Carbon dioxide in Slab production

Table 12-83: Hotspots Human toxicity (cancer) – Steel




Processes Rolling

Slab production

Elementary flows Mercury (+II), Arsenic (+V) in Rolling

Mercury (+II), Lead (+II) in Slab production

Table 12-84: Hotspots Human toxicity (non-cancer) – Steel




Processes Rolling

Slab production

Elementary flows Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), in Rolling

Mercury (+II), Zinc (+II), Lead (+II) in Slab production

Table 12-85: Hotspots Ionising radiation – Steel




Processes Rolling


Elementary flows Carbon (C14) in Rolling

Carbon (C14)) in Secondary Material Production

192

Table 12-86: Hotspots Marine eutrophication potential – Steel




Processes Rolling

Slab production

Elementary flows Nitrogen oxides, Nitrogen in Rolling

Nitrogen oxides, Nitrate in Slab production

Table 12-87: Hotspots Ozone depletion – Steel



Processes

Slab production

Elementary flows R 114 (dichlorotetrafluoroethane), R 11 (trichlorofluoromethane) in Slab production

Table 12-88: Hotspots Particulate Matter/Respiratory Inorganics – Steel





Slab production

Elementary flows

Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5)in Secondary Material Production

Sulphur dioxide, Dust (PM2.5) in Slab production

Table 12-89: Hotspots Photochemical ozone formation – Steel



Processes

Slab production

Elementary flows

Nitrogen oxides and Carbon Monoxide in Slab production

193

Table 12-90: Hotspots Resource Depletion – Steel




Processes Rolling

Slab production

Elementary flows Tantalum in Rolling

Tantalum, Vanadium, iron ore, copper in Slab production

Table 12-91: Hotspots Terrestrial eutrophication – Steel




Processes Rolling

Slab production

Elementary flows Nitrogen oxides in Rolling

Nitrogen oxides in Slab production

Table 12-92: Resource depletion - water – Steel

Resource depletion – water



Processes Rolling


Elementary flows Water (river water from technosphere. turbined), Water (river water) in Rolling

Water (river water from technosphere. turbined), Water (river water) in Secondary Material Production

Table 12-93: Hotspots Land use, Soil Organic Matter (SOM) – Steel


Life cycle stages


Processes

Rolling

Elementary flows

From agricultural, To industrial area in Rolling

194

12.17 ANNEX XVII – DATA QUALITY REQUIREMENTS

Important information for the following calculation principle: Table 12-94 is based on the original table from [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2, Annex F] and adapted for metal sheets. This table shall be used for new data collection and existing datasets.

[PEF pilot Guidance V5.2, Annex F]: ”The dataset quality shall be calculated based on the six quality criteria described below. A semi-quantitative assessment of the overall data quality of the dataset shall be calculated summing up the achieved quality rating for each of the quality criteria, divided by the total number of criteria. The Data Quality Rating (DQR) result is used to identify the corresponding quality level. The semi-quantitative assessment of the overall data quality of the dataset requires the evaluation (and provision as metadata) of each single quality indicator. This evaluation shall be done according to Table 12.94 and formula [1]:

DQR6

EoLPCGRTeRTiR [1]

• DQR : Data Quality Rating of the dataset • TeR: Technological Representativeness • GR: Geographical Representativeness • TiR: Time-related Representativeness • C: Completeness; • P: Precision/uncertainty; • EoL: Implementation of the End-of-Life baseline formula.

NOTE: Until the EF-compliant datasets are available, the above formula shall be applied without the Eol parameter (and hence divided by five) for secondary datasets. For newly created datasets, the formula with six parameters shall be applied. This is a temporary solution only – after the pilot phase, the 6 parameters will be applied for all datasets.

195

Table 12-94: Quality level and rating for the data quality criteria; adapted from [PEF pilot Guidance V5.2]

Quality level

Quality rating

C14 TiR P TeR GR EoL

Very good15

1 All 15 PEF Impact Categories

Data16 are not older than 5 years with respect to the release date

≤ 10% The technologies/raw materials covered in the dataset are exactly the one(s) modelled

The processes included in the dataset are fully representative for the geography stated in the title and metadata

The EoL formula [2] is implemented in the entire dataset (foreground and all background processes)

Good 2 12-14 PEF Impact Categories (and all 10 categories classified I or II in ILCD are included17)

Data are not older than 7 years with respect to the release date

10% to 20%

The technologies/raw materials modelled are included in the mix of technologies covered by the dataset

The processes included in the dataset are well representative for the geography stated in the title and metadata

The EoL formula [2] is implemented in foreground level-1 + level-2 disaggregated processes (see Figures E.2 and E.3)

Fair 3 10-11 PEF Impact Categories (and all 10 categories classified I


20% to 30%

The technologies/raw materials modelled are representative of the

The processes included in the dataset are sufficiently representative for the

The EoL formula [2] is implemented in foreground at level-1disaggregated processes (see Figure E.2)

14 The authors of this PEFCR would associate the completeness criteria to the data collection, e.g. how much of the typical activity data and elementary flows from ANNEX

XI are covered by the user of this PEFCR during its application. If this criteria is indeed referring to impact categories, the name of the parameter should reflect this (e.g.

indicator completeness).

15 In some cases referred to as “excellent”

16 The reference time is the one when data have been originally collected and not the publication/calculation date. In case there are multiple data, the oldest is the one against

which the calculation should be made.

17 The 10 impact categories classified in ILCD Handbook as category I or II are : Climate change, Ozone depletion, particulate matter, ionizing radiation human health,

photochemical ozone formation, acidification, eutrophication terrestrial, eutrophication freshwater, eutrophication marine water, resource depletion mineral fossil and

renewable.

196

or II in ILCD are included)

average technology used for similar processes

geography stated in the title and metadata

Poor 4 8-9 PEF Impact Categories (and all those covered are classified I or II in ILCD)


30% to 50%

Technology/raw material aspects are different from what described in the title and metadata

The processes included in the dataset are only partly representative for the geography stated in the title and metadata

The EoL formula [2] is not implemented, but all information and data needed to calculate all parameters in the EoL formula are available and transparently documented

Very poor

5 Less than 8 PEF Impact Categories (and all those covered are classified I or II in ILCD)

Data are older than 11 years with respect to the release date

> 50% Technology/raw material aspects are completely different from what described in the title and metadata

The processes included in the dataset are not representative for the geography stated in the title and metadata

The EoL formula [2] is not implemented

197

To illustrate the geographical representativeness the following graph gives an overview of location and nature of the main sources of iron-ore on global scale. Without the collection of specific inventory data and thus the need to rely on datasets representing an average supply can have an effect on environmental impacts e.g. resulting from type of mining, transport and/or quality of ore. Especially if the composition of this average LCI is not readily available and no correction can be made to match it better with the specific company mix of the PEFCR user.

The former quality indicator “methodological appropriateness” has been transformed into a minimum entry level, meaning compliance to the methodological aspects is pre-requisite for a dataset to serve as PEFCR conform and applicable dataset.

[PEF pilot Guidance V5.2, Annex F]:”The following methodological requirements shall be fulfilled in order to classify a life cycle inventory dataset as PEF-compliant:

Cut off: a cut-off rule of 95%, based on material or energy flow or the level of environmental significance, is allowed but has to be clearly documented and confirmed by the reviewer, in particular with reference to the environmental significance of the cut-off applied. A cut-off rule lower than 95% is not allowed and the dataset is considered as not-compliant with PEF requirements.

Handling multi-functional processes: the following PEF multi- functionality decision hierarchy shall be applied for resolving all multi- functionality problems: (1) subdivision or system expansion; (2) allocation based on a relevant underlying physical relationship (substitution may apply here); (3) allocation based on some other relationship.

Direct land use change: GHG emissions from direct LUC allocated to good/service for 20 years after the LUC occurs, with IPCC default values.

198

Carbon storage and delayed emissions: credits associated with temporary (carbon) storage or delayed emissions shall not be considered in the calculation of the EF for the default impact categories.

Emissions off-setting: not to be included

Capital goods (including infrastructures) and their End of life: they shall be included unless they can be excluded base on the 95% cut-off rule. The eventual exclusion has to be clearly documented.

System boundaries: system boundaries shall include all processes linked to the product supply chain (e.g. maintenance).

Fossil and biogenic carbon emissions and removals: removals and emissions shall be modelled as follows:”

For the methodological requirement capital goods, a sensitivity analysis showed that capital goods can be excluded based on the 95% cut-off rule for the level of environmental significance, see [SCREENING 2015] and ANNEX XVIII.

199

12.18 ANNEX XVIII – SCREENING STUDY

Executive Summary

The aim of this screening study was to test a harmonised approach leading to defined product

category rules for assessing the environmental impact of metal sheet products to encourage

improvements and possibly for benchmarking and comparison purposes. Specifically (see also section

2.1), the screening aimed to identify hotspots and better understand data quality requirements. The

screening is not intended to make statements about the product group impacts as such. Nor is it

intended to be used in the context of comparison or comparative assertions to be disclosed to the

public. The study has been conducted according to the requirements of the PEF Guide (Annex II to

Recommendation (2013/179/EU) and the Product Environmental Footprint Pilot Guidance (version

4.0). During this screening exercise, problems and approximations identified within some LCIA models

significantly affected the results of the less commonly used LCIA impact categories. Thus, there is a

higher degree of uncertainty in all results for models which were not considered as common LCA

practice at the time of this study.

For the purpose of this screening study, a “metal sheet” is defined as a product manufactured at an

industrial site with specific properties (e.g. mechanical properties, surface properties, conductivity,

etc …) designed for different end-use applications (e.g. building and construction applications,

electrical and electronic equipment, etc.). The metal sheet is an intermediate product. This means

that the use phase is outside the scope of the exercise and that all potential impacts related to the use

phase have not been taken into account in the screening study.

Metal sheets can be used in a very wide variety of applications. The draft PEFCR will define

six representative products: one for copper roofing, one for lead roofing, one for aluminium roofing,

one for steel flooring, one for aluminium appliance bodies and one for steel appliance bodies. For

other metal sheets, any PEF study will first require a screening of the existing PEFCR for metal sheets

and, according to the PEF Guide, an assessment of the applicability of this pilot’s PEFCR to the other

metal sheet will have to be made.

The studied functional unit includes a non-exhaustive list e.g. structural integrity, weather protection,

physical separation, shaping, sealing, aesthetics, etc. to the level required by the most relevant,

international, regional, national or technical standards to a reference extent of 1m².

200

As shown above, the studied production route includes primary and secondary production. The

primary route covers mining, beneficiation, hydro- or pyro-metallurgical processing, casting, rolling

and finishing. End of life material enters at some parts of this flow-sheet. Secondary production can

be a stand-alone production line or can be fully integrated into primary production lines including

collection and sorting of scrap.

Exploration and identification of reserves of natural resources were not considered. Capital goods

are considered as not relevant for the main analysis following a sensitivity analysis. In the

foreground system (core process), no transport was considered at this stage. The use phase and

product life-time were not considered for the intermediate metal sheets, but will be required inthe

PEFCR developed for all final product PEFs. The environmental burdens arising from material

recycling at end-of-life and the associated credit have been calculated by means of six different

recycling formulae, resulting in a global impact in relation to the end-of-life scenario. Such

information will be required via the PEFCR as mandatory additional information for the metal sheet

PEF calculation.

It was assumed that no down-cycling applies to the Resource and Emissions profile of recycled

material input or to the virgin material that it replaces [PEF GUIDE].

It was judged that, for metal, material quality is determined and fixed where material substitution

takes place, i.e. at the point of casting the slab or ingot.

The overall data quality can be considered as good, based on expert judgement, considering precision,

complete coverage of the defined scope and representativeness of the data. For the background

metallurgical and transport processes, this study made use of databases provided by participating

commodity associations based on several previous LCA studies [EAA], [ECI], [ILZRO], [WORLDSTEEL].

For the manufacturing stage, the LCI and LCIA results are strongly impacted by the degree of

development of the LCI. The commodity associations’ LCIs were developed for impact assessment

201

categories commonly used by LCA practitioners. For other background processes (energy grid-mix,

process water etc.) the Gabi Database for the EU27 was used. The GaBi LCI database was reviewed by

ENEA as being ready to comply with the PEF Guide [ENEA].

Allocation based upon physical relationship was applied at ore & beneficiation level while in the case

of mixed ores (Cu and Pb) economic allocation has been applied during the complex processing steps

of the smelting & refining. For by-products such as sulphuric acid, allocation based on physical

relationship was applied using direct substitution.

To identify hotspots, the overall results were split into the manufacturing stage from cradle to gate

(Production); specific emissions associated with material recycling processes if appropriate/necessary

(Recycling); and the associated credits for assumed substitution of virgin material by recycled material

(Material credit). The latter two are the content of the additional environmental information needed

to describe the environmental footprint of the metal sheet at the intermediate status.

The screening suggests that the most relevant life cycle stage to be considered is the manufacturing

stage and, within that, the dominant process is the virgin (or primary) material production. In all

cases, recycling presents a much lower environmental impact for all impact categories with the

exception of ionizing radiation for steel recycling which is dominated by the recycling process because

only electric-arc furnaces are used for secondary steel making. The dominance of the impact of the

primary metal production compared to the impact of recycling shows as well the importance of

considering properly the recycling benefits resulting from the primary metal substituted by recycled

metal. Reflecting adequately such substitution effect is crucial for metals. Hence, for steel, copper and

aluminium sheets, the results show a high dependency on the recycling equation due to the high

discrepancy between the RC and the end of life recycling rate. As a result, it appears crucial to use the

integrated equation (or its equivalent the module D equation) to consider properly these recycling

aspects.

Within the virgin metal production chain, mining & beneficiation (concentration) and smelting and

refining are the dominant contributors to impact assessment categories. .

For two metals (copper and lead), beneficiation of the complex ores by means of complex processes

is required before smelting and refining can take place. For those metals, the mining & beneficiation

step contributes more to the most relevant impact categories than the smelting and refining step. For

the two other metals (aluminium and steel), the opposite is observed.

The impact categories preliminary identified as being recommended for communication are global

warming, acidification and photochemical ozone formation.

The screening suggests that potential freshwater & marine eutrophication and ozone depletion can

be considered as having no significant contribution.

202

Summary PEF impact categories for communication

Impact category

Recommended default LCIA

method

Classification according to

ILCD

Climate Change (Global

warming potential)

Baseline model of 100 years of

the IPCC

I (Overall robustness very high)

Acidification Accumulated Exceedance II (Overall robustness high)

Photochemical ozone

formation

LOTOS-EUROS II (Overall robustness medium)

The following problems related to data availability and methodology were identified:

For several of the default Environment Footprint Impact Categories, only single

characterisation factors are available for the whole of the EU, the use of which is not

considered best practice.

USEtox indicators for metals are still highly uncertain and not sufficiently robust for product

comparison or benchmarking.

The Abiotic Depletion Potential indicator specified in the PEF Guidance is not built upon an

ISO-compliant environmental mechanism, is highly uncertain and lacks robustness and

reproducibility. It also exaggerates metal depletion potential compared to fossil depletion,

which could lead to unjustified material preference.

While the LCIA method to assess potential impacts of particulate matter emissions seems

robust, the dust data shown as PM 2.5-10 probably refer in most cases only to PM 10 due to

difficulties to effectively measure PM2.5 emissions and lack of repeatability of the analytical

methods.

Eutrophication and Toxicity aspects appear overweighed compared e.g. to global warming.

This is due to the fact that three methodologies are used to assess Eutrophication and Toxicity

while only one impact assessment method is used to assess global warming potential.

The screening study has also shown that a sensible identification of the most relevant process steps

in the EF result can be highly influenced by the selected End-of-Life allocation approach. In all cases,

care should be taken to identify the most appropriate scenarios to describe the material flows

related to recycling and to identify the most accurate data for the calculation of the impact of the

recycling stage.

eurometaux product environmental footprint category rules...

Documents