Page 55 - Materials Chemistry, Second Edition
P. 55

2.2 Scope  39

                Therefore, the CEDs of the two variants amount to
                    CED plastic A (3mm)= 3.6kgfU −1  × 60MJkg −1  = 216MJfU −1
                                              −1        −1         −1
                    CED plastic B (2mm)= 3.6kgfU  × 90MJkg  = 324MJfU
                This example is fictitious and, together with the above accomplished rough
               estimates, only serves a better understanding of the fU and the reference flow.
               From this simple example, however, it can already be perceived that, in view of
               the use time as assumed, the thinner product fares substantially worse regarding
               the single criterion CED. This relationship would not change if either any different
                                                          2
               area or a different life time is used in the fU (e.g. 13.4 m /26.7 a).
                If, however, a very short use time, below 15 a, is presumed in the fU in the
               example above, another reference flow would result as a basis of the calculation.
               Very short use times are, however, not reasonable assumptions related to building
               products such as floor coverings, apart from rapidly changing products, for example,
               in halls for trade fairs. The practical problem lies in the determination of realistic
               use times of long-lived products, including the buildings themselves, which set an
               upper limit for many building products. If use times as a function of thickness
               cannot be determined, there can be a way out by restricting the comparison to ‘light
               commodity A versus light commodity B, C, and so on’ and to ‘heavy commodity A
               versus heavy commodity B, C, and so on’. It is thus assumed that life times within
               the groups are similarly long.
                A discussion of the correct use of fUs can be found in Technical Report ISO
               TR 14049. 30)  In addition, a set of product examples is provided, for example,
               lamps, paints and hand-drying systems, and the limits of comparability of technical
               systems are pointed out.
                In view of the central importance of the fU in LCA, its correct determination has
               the highest priority. It should be unambiguously feasible in all those cases, where
               product systems to be compared have the same or a similar performance and fulfil
               a similar function, respectively. Border cases are treated in the next two sections.

                Exercise: Functional Unit and Reference Flow

                Define a meaningful fU and describe the way to specify an appropriate reference
                flow for the following products or services:

                • Ball-point pen
                • Window
                • Disposal of polyethylene (PE) foil
                • Spreading of a daily message.
                Guideline:

                • Which performance do these specified products or services have?
                • Which variants can be considered to generate the performance?


               30)  ISO (2000a).
   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60