Environmental comparison of indoor floor coverings

Abstract

Appropriate selection of construction materials plays a major role in a building's sustainable profile. The studysets out a comparative life cycle assessment of indoorflooring systems of different nature. Theflooring systemsconsisted of coverings and, where required, bonding material and/or impact soundproofing material. The follow-ing coverings were assessed: inorganic (natural stone and ceramic tiles), polymer (carpeting and PVC), andwood-based (laminate and parquet) coverings. The life cycle assessment scope was defined cradle to cradle,i.e. product stage, transport to the construction site, installation of all construction elements, use, and valorisationby recycling, as end-of-life transition scenario towards a circular economy. In the use stage, three scenarios weredefined as a function of pedestrian traffic intensity, which determined maintenance, repair, and replacement op-erations and frequencies. The environmental impacts of the coverings product stage were taken from previouslyassessed and selected Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), as these are standardised public documentsdevised to provide environmental life cycle information. The method adopted in the study suggests that, thoughthe use of EPDs as information source is interesting, erroneous conclusions may be drawn if the EPDs are notcomparable and/or if the comparison is not made in the building context. The results indicate that the flooring ystems with inorganic coverings performed best in the global warming, acidification, eutrophication, photo-chemical ozone creation, and abiotic depletion for fossil resources impact categories, whereas laminates per-formed best in the abiotic depletion for non-fossil resources and ozone layer depletion impact categories. Thecarpetflooringsystem performedworst inevery impact category except photochemicalozone creation potential.