Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: Chestnut structural sawn timber with treatment; 534 kg/m3 at 10% humidity at the factory gate (en) en es

Key Data Set Information
Location ES
Geographical representativeness description This EPD has been elaborated seeking the greatest possible representativeness of the chestnut structural sawn timber sector in Spain. The inventory data have been obtained from practical case studies with real consumption data from factories, machinery and product catalogues and specialised bibliography.
Reference year 2020
Name
Base name ; Quantitative product or process properties
Chestnut structural sawn timber with treatment; 534 kg/m3 at 10% humidity at the factory gate
Use advice for data set *All stages of the LCA have been considered, carrying out a "cradle to grave" analysis, including module D "Additional information beyond the life cycle of the building". * Biogenic carbon sequestration and emission has been calculated according to the UNE-EN 16485 standard and under the modularity principle of the UNE-EN 15804 standard. The UNE-EN 16449 standard was used to calculate the biogenic carbon content and its transformation into biogenic CO2. All the wood evaluated in this project comes from national forests and has sustainable forest management and chain of custody certification, so it is assumed to be biogenic carbon neutral.
Technical purpose of product or process • The use considered for the product type is as a structural element (primary and/or secondary roofing), working under conditions of use class 2 and service class 2. • Defined product type: Structural sawn timber profile (board, plank) of chestnut at 10% moisture content with surface treatment (lasur) of dimensions 50 x 150 x 3000 mm.
Classification
Class name : Hierarchy level
  • ILCD: Materials production / Wood
General comment on data set - Data quality: Data on energy and raw material consumption in the production of a functional unit of product type have been estimated from data provided by national manufacturers, studies based on real experiences and from the review of specialised literature. The data on additives have been extracted from the technical data sheets of commercial brands commonly used in the sector, as well as from data provided by national manufacturers of the typical product. In any case, the data selection and consumption estimations have been carried out seeking the highest representativeness of the chestnut structural sawn timber sector in Spain. The data used are assumed to be of level 1 quality because they come from recognised and reliable sources from the study area, as well as the technological processes are referred to the final product. - Assignment: The allocation has been carried out following the UNE-EN 15804 standard whenever possible. The energy consumed by the machinery in the manufacturing process was obtained by means of estimates based on data on power demand, performance and hourly consumption from practical experience with real data, data from manufacturers of the typical product and specialised bibliography. Likewise, the energy consumption data for the raw material extraction and transport phases have been estimated on the basis of real machinery data obtained from catalogues and specialised bibliography that includes practical case studies. - Cut-off criteria: All raw material and energy consumptions have been taken into account except those related to the maintenance of machines and vehicles and the replacement of parts worn out by use. - Application of a product: Structural element (board, plank) in a humid environment and indoor use. - Reference quantity for the functional unit: 1 m3 of structural sawn timber of chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.) for use as a structural element (strong support: framing). - Quantified key properties: - Strength Class: D24 (UNE-EN 1912/ UEN-EN 56546). - Class of use: 2 (UNE-EN 335) - Service Class: 2 (UNE-EN 1995-1-1 and CTE DB-SEM) - Minimum performance characteristics to be maintained during the RSL: Resistance class and use and service class. - RSL >100 years
Scenarios
  • Scenario: Deconstrucción/demolición (C1) -
  • Scenario: Extracción de materias primas (A1) -
  • Scenario: Uso (B1-7) -
  • Scenario: Transporte hacia el cliente final (A4) -
  • Scenario: Beneficios y cargas más allá del límite del sistema (potencial de recuperación y/o reciclaje) (D) -
  • Scenario: Transporte al lugar del sitio de demolición de desechos (C2) -
  • Scenario: Transporte de materia prima (A2) -
  • Scenario: Vertidos (C4) -
  • Scenario: Fabricación (A3) -
  • Scenario: Tratamiento de residuos (C3) -
  • Scenario: Instalación en el edificio (A5) -
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Content declaration
NameMass (%)Mass (kg)RenewableRecyclableRecycledCAS numberEC numberComment
Product
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
  • Structural sawn timber of chestnut with lasur surface treatment
    - 1.0 * (not available)
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2025
Time representativeness description Stable data over time for the selected standard installations.
Technological representativeness
Technology description including background system (A1) The exploitation The exploitation model under consideration consists of felling with a chainsaw, harvesting with a chainsaw, harvesting with a tracked tractor and skidding with a skidder. chainsaw, harvesting with a tracked tractor and skidding with a skidder. (A2) Transport of raw material to the sawmill Transport from the forest to the sawmill is carried out with a crane truck, which also unloads the roundwood in the yard, so this operation is considered in phase A2. An average distance of 50 km between the forest and the mill and a truck with a capacity of 22 MT has been considered. The transport of lubricants and chemical products (lasur) from the warehouse to the sawmill is carried out by a van with a load capacity of 6.6 m3 and an average distance of 20 km is considered, giving a total of 40 km for each product delivery. (A3) Manufacturing The inputs to the system are chestnut roundwood, lubricants and wood chemicals (lasur) as raw material and fuel and electricity as energy. A typical sawmill has been considered with the following flow: cross-cutting, main sawing with two-cut bandsaw and trolley, splitting, cross-cutting, drying, edging, resizing and lasur treatment.
Flow diagram(s) or picture(s)
  • System boundaries - Chestnut sawn timber Image

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Raw material supply
A1
Production
A1-A3
Transport
A2
Manufacturing
A3
Transport
A4
Installation
A5
De-construction
C1
Transport
C2
Waste processing
C3
Disposal
C4
Recycling Potential
D
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Input
  • 0
  • 0.1
  • 0
  • 0.1
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Input
  • 152.8
  • 1.23E+4
  • 92.97
  • 772
  • 165.2
  • 46.07
  • 0
  • 65.12
  • 118.7
  • 14.92
  • 0.008346
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Input
  • 1.12E+4
  • 1.12E+4
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -1.12E+4
  • 0
Input
  • 0
  • 1096
  • 0
  • 1096
  • 0
  • 19.9
  • 0
  • 28.01
  • 0
  • 5.631
  • 0
Input
  • 0
  • 75.69
  • 0
  • 75.69
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 152.8
  • 1.23E+4
  • 92.97
  • 772
  • 165.2
  • 46.07
  • 0
  • 65.12
  • 118.7
  • 14.92
  • 0.008346
Input
  • 1.12E+4
  • 1.23E+4
  • 0
  • 1096
  • 0
  • 19.9
  • 0
  • 28.01
  • 0
  • -1.119E+4
  • 0

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
Production
A1-A3
Transport
A2
Manufacturing
A3
Transport
A4
Installation
A5
De-construction
C1
Transport
C2
Waste processing
C3
Disposal
C4
Recycling Potential
D
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • 24.44
  • 171.4
  • 9.246
  • 137.7
  • 16.43
  • 16.43
  • 2E+1
  • 11.81
  • 2.648
  • 0.00083
  • -142
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • 0.000645
  • 0.001038
  • 0.0003926
  • 0
  • 0.0006974
  • 0.00001762
  • 0.00002591
  • 0.0005013
  • 0.00001296
  • 3.524E-8
  • -0.000959
  • 198.6
  • 319.4
  • 120.9
  • 0
  • 214.7
  • 5.425
  • 7.977
  • 154.3
  • 3.989
  • 0.01085
  • -295.2
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • 0.01797
  • 0.0289
  • 0.01094
  • 0
  • 0.01943
  • 0.0004909
  • 0.0007218
  • 0.01396
  • 0.0003609
  • 9.817E-7
  • -0.02672
  • 0.1106
  • 0.1779
  • 0.0673
  • 0
  • 0.1196
  • 0.003021
  • 0.004442
  • 0.08594
  • 0.002221
  • 0.000006042
  • -0.1644

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
Production
A1-A3
Transport
A2
Manufacturing
A3
Transport
A4
Installation
A5
De-construction
C1
Transport
C2
Waste processing
C3
Disposal
C4
Recycling Potential
D
1This impact category deals mainly with the eventual impact of low dose ionizing radiation on human health of the nuclear fuel cycle. It does not consider effects due to possible nuclear accidents, occupational exposure nor due to radioactive waste disposal in underground facilities. Potential ionizing radiation from the soil, from radon and from some construction materials is also not measured by this indicator.
2The results of this environmental impact indicator shall be used with care as the uncertainties on these results are high or as there is limited experiences with the indicator.
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND
  • ND