Comparative Life Cycle Assessment between Ordinary Gypsum Plasterboard and Functional Phase-Change Gypsum Plasterboard

Abstract:

With the emphasis of national policies on green manufacturing and the recognition of the people for green development, expanding the green assessment of products will be the general trend. In this study the life cycle assessment method was used to compile a list of resources, energy consumption and pollutant emissions during the life cycle of typical ordinary gypsum plasterboard and functional phase-change gypsum plasterboard, the key environmental impact indicators of both products during the life cycle calculated, the key stages affecting the environmental performance of products analyzed and identified, and the difference in environmental impacts between phase-change gypsum plasterboard and ordinary gypsum plasterboard compared and analyzed, for guiding the selection of green building materials and the development of ecological building materials. The results show that the global warming potential of phase-change gypsum plasterboard is 3.42 kgCO₂ equivalent/m², the non-renewable resource depletion potential is 2.25×10^-5 kgSb equivalent/m², the respiratory inorganic is 1.97×10^-3 kgPM_2.5 equivalent/m², the eutrophication is 1.21×10^-3 kgPO₄^3- equivalent/m², and the acidification is 9.47×10^-3 kgSO₂ equivalent/m². Compared with ordinary gypsum plasterboard, the phase-change gypsum plasterboard shows the biggest increase by 874.03% in non-renewable resource depletion potential. The major environmental impact of ordinary gypsum plasterboard in the life cycle is mainly from energy use, and the transport process is the main stage of eutrophication. The use of phase-change materials in the phase-change gypsum plasterboard is the main stage causing environmental impact.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 993)
• Pages: 1473-1480
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.993.1473
• Online since: May 2020
• Authors: Yan Jiao Zhang*, Li Ping Ma, Shi Wei Ren, Meng Chi Huang, Ying Wang, Qi Long Zhang
• Keywords: Functional Materials, Green Building Materials, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Ordinary Gypsum Plasterboard, Phase Change Gypsum Plasterboard

References

[1] L Ma, The life cycle assessment of plasterborad, Beijing University of Technology. (2012).

[2] J Feng, H Chen, Energy Saving and Emission Reduction of Paper-faced Gypsum Board from the Perspective of Life Cycle Assessment, Collected Papers of the Third Annual Meeting of Gypsum Building Materials Branch of China Building Materials Federation and the Seventh National Gypsum Technology Exchange Conference and Exhibition in 2012. (2012).

[3] B Wang, Application and Development Potential of Functional Paper-faced Gypsum Board, New Building Materials. 36 (2009) 61-64.

[4] Z Wang, M Cao, A Gong, etc, Types, Applications and Prospects of Phase-change Energy-storing Materials, Anhui Chemical Industry. 2(2005) 8-10.

[5] K Du, Study on Preparation and Properties of Phase-change Thermal Insulation Wall Materials, Chongqing University. (2009).

[6] L Zeng, H Wang, X Cheng, etc, Study on Preparation and Properties of Phase-change Energy-storing Gypsum Board, New Building Materials. 39 (2012) 27-29.

[7] T Zuo, Z Feng, Material Recycling and Environmental Impact Assessment of Cyclic Society 2008, pp.36-41.

[8] J Jiang, Y Wu, J Ma, etc,. Technical Framework and Study Progress of Life Cycle Assessment, Journal of Lanzhou University of Technology.31 (2005) 23-26.

[9] N Ding, J Liu, J Yang, etc, Water footprints of energy sources in China: Exploring options to improve water efficiency, Journal of Cleaner Production. 174 (2018) 1021-1031.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.273

[10] B Sun, Z Nie, G Feng, etc, Cumulative exergy demand analysis of the primary aluminum produced in China and its natural resource-saving potential in transportation, International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 20 (2015) 1048-1060.

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-014-0828-9

[11] G Feng, Z Nie, D Yang, etc, Environmental impacts analysis of titanium sponge production using Kroll process in China,. Journal of Cleaner Production. 174(2018) 771-779.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.240

[12] GB/T 24025-2009, Environmental Labels and Declarations—Type Ⅲ Environmental Declarations—Principles and Procedures.

DOI: 10.3403/30101513u

[13] GB/T 24040-2008, Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework.

[14] GB/T 24044-2008, Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines.

[15] CNMLCA, Sinocenter materials life cycle inventory database, Beijing University of Technology. beijing.

[16] X Liu, H Wang, J Chen, etc, Establishment Approach and Base Model of Chinese Life Cycle Reference Database, Journal of Environmental Science. 30 (2010) 2136-2144.

[17] Ecoinvent, 2016. Ecoinvent Database v3.1 (2016). Ecoinvent-center. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories. (2016).

DOI: 10.1007/s11367-013-0642-9