IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i21p9581-d1513410.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis of the Environmental Impacts of Wood–Aluminum Window Production in Two Life Cycle Assessment Software

Author

Listed:
  • Michal Sečkár

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovakia)

  • Marián Schwarz

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovakia)

  • Adam Pochyba

    (Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, Technical University in Zvolen, T. G. Masaryka 24, 960 01 Zvolen, Slovakia)

  • András Polgár

    (Institute of Environmental Protection and Nature Conservation, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sopron, Bajcsy-Zsilinszky u. 4, 9400 Sopron, Hungary)

Abstract

In the construction sector, there is a shift towards environmentally conscious practices that prioritize the minimization of environmental burdens. In this study, we dealt with a cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment (LCA) of a wood–aluminum window in two software tools. SimaPro (PRé Sustainability) and Sphera LCA for Experts (formerly known as GaBi) were selected. The results from both software tools were compared to assess the output uniformity of the two selected tools. The results indicate the similarities and differences in the software tools. The most similar results were achieved for impact categories Photochemical Ozone Formation (1.1% difference), Human Toxicity, cancer (total) (3.6% difference), Climate Change (3.7% difference) and for Resource Use, fossils (4.5% difference), respectively. On the other hand, the results were most different in the impact categories Ozone Depletion (84.7% difference), Resource Use, minerals and metals (75% difference), Ecotoxicity, freshwater—inorganics (35.6%) and Ecotoxicity, freshwater (total) (31.2%), respectively. The differences in the LCA results between SimaPro and GaBi were analyzed in-depth and were mainly attributable to using different databases in the transportation process and due to different system boundaries in some processes, with the Ecoinvent data containing significantly more background processes and inconsistencies in the implemented characterization factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Michal Sečkár & Marián Schwarz & Adam Pochyba & András Polgár, 2024. "A Comparative Analysis of the Environmental Impacts of Wood–Aluminum Window Production in Two Life Cycle Assessment Software," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-18, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:21:p:9581-:d:1513410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/21/9581/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/21/9581/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Pauer & Bernhard Wohner & Manfred Tacker, 2020. "The Influence of Database Selection on Environmental Impact Results. Life Cycle Assessment of Packaging Using GaBi, Ecoinvent 3.6, and the Environmental Footprint Database," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-14, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francisco Portillo & Rosa María García & Alfredo Alcayde & José Antonio Gázquez & Manuel Fernández-Ros & Nuria Novas, 2021. "Prospective Environmental and Economic Assessment of a Sensor Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Sileryte, Rusne & Sabbe, Arnout & Bouzas, Vasileios & Meister, Kozmo & Wandl, Alexander & van Timmeren, Arjan, 2022. "European Waste Statistics data for a Circular Economy Monitor: opportunities and limitations from the Amsterdam Metropolitan Region," OSF Preprints da6f2, Center for Open Science.
    3. Marco Vacchi & Cristina Siligardi & Erika Iveth Cedillo-González & Anna Maria Ferrari & Davide Settembre-Blundo, 2021. "Industry 4.0 and Smart Data as Enablers of the Circular Economy in Manufacturing: Product Re-Engineering with Circular Eco-Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Davide Rovelli & Carlo Brondi & Michele Andreotti & Elisabetta Abbate & Maurizio Zanforlin & Andrea Ballarino, 2022. "A Modular Tool to Support Data Management for LCA in Industry: Methodology, Application and Potentialities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    5. Brenda Miranda Xicotencatl & René Kleijn & Sander van Nielen & Franco Donati & Benjamin Sprecher & Arnold Tukker, 2023. "Data implementation matters: Effect of software choice and LCI database evolution on a comparative LCA study of permanent magnets," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(5), pages 1252-1265, October.
    6. Rosaliya Kurian & Kishor Sitaram Kulkarni & Prasanna Venkatesan Ramani & Chandan Swaroop Meena & Ashok Kumar & Raffaello Cozzolino, 2021. "Estimation of Carbon Footprint of Residential Building in Warm Humid Climate of India through BIM," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-16, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:21:p:9581-:d:1513410. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.