Alu Life Cycle 1

Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking
Towards Sustainable Cities
Stephanie Carlisle
Efrie Friedlander
Billie Faircloth
CP

International Aluminium Institute
© KieranTimberlake 2015
Philadelphia, PA USA
Series Editor: Michael Stacey

Michael Stacey Architects
Front cover: Aluminium in construction for Cellophane House in New York, New York,
Michael Stacey Architects
USA (Architect KieranTimberlake, photograph by Albert Vecerka)
While every effort has been made to check the accuracy and quality of the
S4AA: given in this publication, neither the Author nor the Publisher ac-
information
Cymru
cept any responsibility for the subsequent use of this information, for any errors
or omissions that it may contain, or for any misunderstandings arising from it.
ISBN 978-0-9930162-2-6
Published by Cwningen Press, 2015
www.kierantimberlake.com
CwningenPress
ARCHITECTURE
ATRG
+ TECTONICS
RESEARCH GROUP
CwningenPress Michael Stacey Architects

Contents
One Introduction 6
Two Life Cycle Approach 14
Three Life Cycle Assessment of Window 26

Framing
Four Modelling Recyclability & Recycling 44
Five Modelling Durability 58
Six Modelling Manufacturing 72
Seven Interim Conclusion 88
Appendix
92 Frame Assembly Materials
98 Glossary
104 Bibliography
116 Image Credits
120 Acknowledgements
124 Publication Series

ONE
introduction
6 introduction introduction 7
Electrolysis Casting Hot rolling mill Cold rolling Foil mill Fabrication Products
mill Cars
Foil VEHICLES
Liquid aluminium Ingot (28%)
Alumina (for wrought) Cold-rolled Other
sheet/strip
Hot-rolled strip Mechanical
Plate INDUSTRIAL Electrical

EQUIPMENT cable
(28%)
Extrusion Electrical
Extrusions
Structural
End of Life Remelter
in buildings
(scrap) Wire drawing
Liquid aluminium Cable/wire
CONSTRUCTION Non-structural
(33%) in buildings
Fabrication
(scrap) Infrastructure
Die castings
Drink cans
Forming Refiner Casting Secondary casting Permanent
(scrap) mould castings
Liquid aluminium Ingot Packaging
(for cast)
METAL foil
Sand castings PRODUCTS Consumer
(11%) durables
Other
Other
Global flow of aluminium
Fig 1.1 Global flow of aluminium (based on Allwood et.al, 201,

additional mass flow data from IAI 2015)
Introduction
Towards Sustainable Cities - Quantifying the In Use Benefits of

Aluminium in Architecture and the Built Environment serves to
complement the relatively well-understood benefits of aluminium
in other use sectors, such as transportation or packaging. A vital
goal of this research is to quantify the potential contribution of
aluminium towards the creation of sustainable cities: a key task as
now over half of humanity lives in urban areas. Towards Sustainable
Cities is funded by the International Aluminium Institute [IAI].
The programme was initiated by Chris Bayliss, Deputy Secretary
General at IAI, and Michael Stacey of Michael Stacey Architects
in Nottingham, England, in the spring of 2012. Programme
collaborators include the Architecture & Tectonics Research
Group [ATRG] of the University of Nottingham, and Stephanie
Carlisle, Efrie Friedlander, and Billie Faircloth of KieranTimberlake in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Towards Sustainable Cities is structured as a series of studies on

the primary benefits of aluminium’s use in architecture–durability,
recyclability, flexibility, lightness, efficiency, economy and sympathy
(IAI, 2014). The first report, Aluminium and Durability (Stacey, 2014),
amasses case study buildings that pioneered aluminium’s use
alongside exemplary historical and contemporary examples,
to evidence life expectancy and service life (terms in bold are
defined in the Glossary) for aluminium building components. The
second report, Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling (Stacey,
2015), documents current building demolition protocols inclusive
of the collection, reuse and recycling of building materials and
components. It gathers case study buildings that demonstrate re-
glazing/re-fenestration, over cladding, retrofit, deep-retrofit, and
short-life building techniques–all dependent upon aluminium’s
economic value and ability to be collected and continuously
recycled.
Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking, the third report in the series,
explores the environmental impact of durability and recyclability
Fig 1.2 Life cycle stages for by investigating an aluminium building product’s life cycle, or the
aluminium: mining,
aluminium billets, use, stages through which it passes during its lifetime. Raw materials
reclamation, and remelt
extraction, product manufacturing, use and maintenance, and
to recycle
processing at the end of a product’s useful life constitute stages
that may be examined in-depth to understand the environmental
benefits attributable to an aluminium building product.
Life cycle thinking encourages the actors across the entire value Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking is structured into seven chapters.
chain – manufacturers, professional architects and engineers, Chapter Two: A Life Cycle Approach introduces the method of LCA
contractors and building owners – to be mindful of the life history of and its application to building and construction products. It also
any manufactured product, and more specifically, to understand identifies where aluminium may be found in a building. Chapter
the inputs (including resources such as energy and water) and Three: Life Cycle Assessment of Window Framing describes the
outputs (emissions to the environment) that result from the parameters and window assemblies used in the three LCA models
transformation of materials into product, from product to service, that follow and that correspond to report chapters.
and from service and to disposal. Life cycle thinking challenges
architects, engineers, and contractors to make such mindfulness Chapter Four: Modelling Recycling and Recyclability investigates
useful and valuable to the practice of ecologically responsible contributions of recycling through a comparison of four window
building design and construction. framing assemblies. It asks: ‘How do modelling choices with
respect to the treatment of recycling affect the assessment of
If life cycle thinking is a framework through which a building the assemblies’ environmental impacts at end of life?’ Chapter
product’s life history is given consideration, Life Cycle Assessment, Five: Modelling Durability studies the same assemblies during their
or LCA, is the modelling method used to quantify a product’s use to query the importance of maintenance and replacement
environmental impacts. LCA models may be used to study specific impacts within the overall life span of a material assembly. It also
questions regarding the environmental impacts of a given building asks, ‘Which material elements of window framing assemblies
product across selected stages of product life. Increasingly, LCA contribute the most to environmental impacts for a given service/
is a modelling practice being adopted by, or mandated to, function?’ Chapter Six: Modelling Manufacturing focuses on
architects and engineers during the design process in order to give the production of aluminium window frames, asking: ‘How does
consideration to environmental impact information during the variability in the manufacturing process change the magnitude
selection of materials, components and assemblies (Bayer 2010, of the environmental impacts of aluminium building products over
Al-Ghamdi 2015). their full lifetime?’
The creation of original LCA models complements the goals of The report concludes with a final chapter that discusses the
Towards Sustainable Cities – Quantifying the In Use Benefits of implications of the findings associated with each LCA model on
Aluminium in Architecture and the Built Environment. Having design decision-making with respect to environmental impact.
established knowledge of the attributes durable and recyclable
through the collection of case studies in the first and second
reports, the LCA models created and interpreted in this report
support ‘if–then’ investigations for selected stages. These increase
a designer’s awareness of aluminium’s environmental impact,
when for instance, she assumes a range of recycling rates; or
assumes a given life span for a building component; or assumes
various energy mixes during production. Ultimately, these models
are provided to foster discourse on how life cycle thinking may
be applied to decisions about aluminium’s potential use in
architecture.
TWO
life cycle approach

14 life cycle approach life cycle approach 15
Life Cycle Approach: Assessing the Sustainability of
Aluminium in Buildings
Collectively, buildings have significant environmental impacts Life Cycle Assessment
throughout their life cycles, from material production and initial Life Cycle Assessment [LCA] offers a rigorous, quantitative means of
construction through use and eventual demolition and disposal/ exploring the sustainability claims, resource use and environmental
recycling. Since the 1980s, architects, engineers, building owners impacts of products from cradle to grave. LCA provides a means
and industry have primarily focused on reducing the operational of exploring the environmental impacts and benefits associated
energy use of building systems as the primary means of reducing with each stage of a product’s life cycle – including material
environmental impacts. As architects and engineers continue to sourcing and manufacture, maintenance and use, as well as
strive to make buildings less energy intensive to operate, increasing disposal, recycling and reuse – through a structured methodology
attention is being paid to another source of environmental of tracking material inputs and outputs across a product’s life
impacts: those associated with building materials and construction cycle. While LCA methodology is by no means a comprehensive
processes. metric of sustainability or environmental performance, it is an
important and effective tool for guiding nuanced and informed
Understanding the full impacts of buildings and construction
comparisons of complex products and systems across a diverse
requires examination of the full building system life cycle, including
range of impact categories, ranging from global warming
impacts that occur far from the building site in both space and
potential to acidification potential.
time. Concrete, metals, wood, plastics and other materials have
complex supply chains involving extraction, transportation and While Life Cycle Assessment has been in use for over two decades,
manufacturing processes that are consumptive of resources its application in the building and construction industry is relatively
and cause emissions to the atmosphere, hydrosphere and recent (Bayer et al. 2010, Crawford 2011, Simonen 2014). To date,
pedosphere. Architects, engineers and specifiers are often aware the majority of construction-related LCAs have focused either on
of materials and their properties, but how can these materials’ simplified models of whole buildings (with approximate values for
embodied environmental impacts and the potential they have an estimated bill of materials) or on the assessment of isolated
to reduce environmental impact through intelligent design, long building materials, e.g., steel, concrete, flooring, paint. Complex
life or recyclability be measured? How can material assemblies assemblies composed of numerous materials, such as curtain
containing dozens of materials be compared to one another? walling, windows and doors, roofing assemblies and structural
How can designers understand the trade-offs between low systems, are just beginning to be better understood and modelled
impact materials and durability? What role does manufacturing through the application of nuanced LCAs.
or recycling play in the total life cycle impacts of construction
materials, and by extension, architectural design?
Buildings Building
2358 MMT CO2eq Opera ons
44.6% 41.7%
Industry
Industry
Image of Aluminium in
1116 MMT CO2eq
21.1% 24.4%
Building Construc on
and Materials
5.9%
Fig 2.2 Aluminium and glass
curtainwall compose construction
the three principal faces
of this tower, at Center
City Building, University
Transporta on Transporta on - Other Transporta on - Light Duty
of North Carolina at
1816 MMT CO2eq (rail, air, bus, truck, ship) (auto SUV, pickup, minivan)
34.3% 11.8% 16.3% Charlotte, USA, designed
by KieranTimberlake. A
pattern of transparent,
U.S. CO2 EMISSIONS BY SECTOR U.S. ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY SECTOR fritted, and opaque panels
screen solar radiation while
maximizing natural light
Fig 2.1 U.S. CO2 Emissions and Energy Consumption by Sector (data based on and views and working
Architecture 2030 and U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2012) seamlessly with a concrete
and steel structure

With the development of Environmental Product Declarations
[EPDs] and other codified methodologies for conducting product-
based LCAs, practitioners have begun to grapple with the
resolution and specificity that LCA offers while also struggling
to make sense of the often technical language and abstract
results found in documentation that treats environmental impact
information as a sort of ‘ingredient list’ or ‘nutrition’ label.
While there can be value in establishing an approximate carbon

footprint or other environmental metric for a material or product,
the real power of LCA as a tool for designers comes from its utility as
a comparative assessment methodology that allows for nuanced
comparisons of different material assemblies that serve the same
function in a building, while respecting each option’s unique
material attributes and design logic. Furthermore, modelling
practice in LCA is far from fixed or rigid (UNEP/SETAC 2011, PE
International 2014). The detail captured in a comparative LCA
model, and the ability to fine-tune the modelling process to a very
specific mode of inquiry, allows for a productive exploration of a
wide range of comparative research questions related to design
choices, material selection, manufacturing processes, durability of
Image of Brock- assemblies, geographic variability of recycling rates and product
man Hall life-times, as well as the relationship between building detailing
and end-of-life scenarios.
Integrating a broader view of the material life cycle to include use

and end-of-life stages is particularly important when evaluating
materials that require a high initial resource or energetic investment
but that have the potential to save resources through their use,
reuse and recycling or energy recovery at end of life. These stages
must also be treated with great care when different materials are
compared, to make sure that a model is recognizing the limitations
and opportunities nascent in material attributes. Just as cost
analysis has been used by the design community to understand
that products with higher first-costs may be less expensive to a
client over the long term, LCA has the capacity to illustrate the
environmental impacts of building assemblies beyond those
associated with operational energy efficiency or initial material
investment - the total environmental cost of ownership.
Fig 2.3 Glass and aluminium

curtainwall at Brockman
Hall for Physics at Rice
University, Houston,
Texas, USA, designed by
KieranTimberlake

The Stock and Flow of Aluminium Through Buildings
In order to examine the potential contribution of aluminium to Consumer Durables, the duration of the study. Picking an appropriate duration of study
Packaging and Other
architecture, we must understand not only how flows of aluminium 11% for a Life Cycle Assessment of building materials and assemblies
into buildings contribute to their embodied environmental impacts, is difficult. If the study period is too short, the model may not
but also how stocks of aluminium in buildings contribute to their accurately capture the relationship between long-life and short-
performance over the full life span of the building. A considerable Machinery life materials flowing through a building system. If the modelling
Buildings
amount of the global stock of in-use aluminium is found in buildings. 10% 33% period is too long, it adds increased uncertainty and may not be
Recent mass flow modelling by the International Aluminium comparable with other previous studies.
Institute [IAI] indicates that more than a third of aluminium currently Electrical
in productive use is found in buildings (IAI 2015a). That aluminium 18% While there is no globally agreed upon estimate of ‘typical’
Transport
takes a number of forms, both readily visible and hidden from 28%
building life for LCA, many studies use time periods of 60-80 years
sight. Aluminium can be installed as a gutter or a piece of trim; in to assess building components, systems and full buildings. While
building products, such as solar panels or light fixtures; or in complex some buildings and building components clearly last far longer
building assemblies, such as curtain walling or window framing. In Aluminium in Productive Use than this estimate (Stacey 2014), these figures are deemed to
Fig 2.4 Distribution of aluminium in
each case, aluminium is selected for one or more of its attributes, productive use by sector Fasteners represent an average building lifetime, and their use allows for
such as its light weight, long service life, reflectivity, conductivity, (data based on IAI 2015) comparison across studies of various building systems and materials
strength, formability or low maintenance requirements. (Preservation Green Lab 2012, US Department of Energy 2010).
Each of these applications represents a different contribution to Presently, none of the international LCA standards mandate
Railing
the overall flow of aluminium through a building, and the product’s the use of a particular typical building life, allowing practitioners
service lifetime is important to the evaluation of its contributions to the freedom to build models that best test their particular study
the building’s environmental impacts. Some of these applications Stair questions and represent project or site specific considerations.
Hardware
of aluminium have short lifetimes - they are products that come in Additionally, it has become more common for studies to
and out of a building over a period of months or years. Others are approach questions from a holistic perspective, combining Life
longer-term flows that remain integral to the performance of the Door
Cycle Assessment with other metrics, such as Life Cycle Costing
building over its entire life span. Generally speaking, the aluminium [LCC]. Consistency in time periods between modelling techniques
products with the largest amount of mass, such as structural is another important consideration.
Window
systems and façade systems, will be in place for most (if not all) Frame
of the building life, while applications with smaller mass will flow Paneling As the practice of LCA becomes more widely used in the building
through the building much more quickly. Aluminium can also be and construction industry, such factors may become codified
Curtainwall
a minor but critical part of a product with another base material, Framing and standardized over time. Several standards, such as 2012
for example as an ingredient in the high-performance film in an International Green Construction Code (IgCC), LEED v4, BREEAM,
insulated glass unit [IGU] or aluminium fasteners and hardware in Green Globes, Green Star, Green Building Evaluation Label:
a piece of wooden or composite millwork. An incandescent light Three Star, and 2010 California Green Building Standard Code
bulb with an aluminium socket will likely have a shorter residence Decking (CALGreen), have adopted whole-building LCA and require
time than the pendant, with aluminium housing, in which it is whole-building models to be run for a minimum of 60 years.
placed, which in turn will be in the building for less time than the
aluminium track from which it hangs.
Much of the available research on aluminium tends to focus on

singular products or on aluminium as a raw material. From a design
perspective, it is important to view aluminium as part of a complex
building system. From a life cycle perspective, the role a material
plays in the performance of a building is key to contextualizing the Fig 2.5 Exploded axonometric
diagram showing typical
environmental impacts associated with the use of that material. uses of aluminium in the
When building materials, assemblies and even whole buildings are building sector
evaluated, a modelled building life must be assigned to serve as

Life Cycle Stages of Aluminium Products
For the purpose of LCA, products are examined in four distinct The use stage for an aluminium product includes any use,
stages, each associated with particular processes, inputs and maintenance, replacement, and repair regime impacts over
outputs. This practice helps to clarify the scope of the analysis the duration of the study. This stage is where trade-offs between
and to clarify where and when impacts occur across a product material choices such as the life cycle costs, performance,
life cycle. Breaking down results into life cycle stages allows maintenance, durability, or constructability may come into play.
researchers to fine-tune their assessments and allows designers Also included are any processes or materials associated with
opportunities to understand, improve and critique the impact product use, such as operational energy or water use. When the
of design decisions. While there are a number of ways to divide duration of study is set to the life cycle of a building, rather than
life cycle stages, the following list describes the stages used in a single product guarantee period, such concerns become even
this study and gives some examples of questions that may be of more relevant. This stage focuses on the questions: ‘Is durability
concern to designers associated with each stage. important for this product? What inputs are needed for this
product to function? Is it more efficient to do a lot of maintenance
The extraction stage is primarily concerned with the mining and or to replace the product more frequently?’
production of raw materials used in primary aluminium production.
Important considerations in this stage are the impacts of the Finally, the end-of-life stage includes the demolition, sorting,
technologies and processes used for mining, producing, and collection and treatment of aluminium products after they
transporting bauxite–including geographical location of mines, are no longer in use. As most aluminium used in building and
technologies used for energy production, and mining runoff construction is recycled at the end of life due to its high economic
control. While the extraction of raw materials for aluminium affects value (van Houwelingen 2004), LCAs often assign credits to
Fig 2.6 Exposed structural
a large land area, its total environmental impacts are far lower aluminium framing and scrap that is returned to material streams by calculating the
than production processes, such as smelting (Atherton 2007, PE interior detailing at avoided environmental burden that would have resulted from
Loblolly House, a private
International 2014). The driving questions for this stage of analysis residence in Maryland, the production of primary aluminium. The relative impacts per
ask: ‘What materials are in the product? How are those materials USA, designed by life cycle stage vary considerably by material and by impact
KieranTimberlake
obtained?’ category. For example, for materials such as asbestos or lead, end-
of-life processing and disposal will play a significant role in total life
The production stage encompasses the refining, smelting, casting, cycle impacts. For aluminium and others with high energy intensity
and manufacturing required for the production of aluminium from production or high recycling rates, these impacts are minimal
as well as the impacts of the building construction processes and often overshadowed by credits from material returned to
associated with the product. Also commonly referred to simply as the product stream. Analysis of this stage requires answers to the
manufacturing and often combined with material sourcing and following questions: ‘What will recycling and reclamation practices
extraction, this is also the stage in which primary and recycled be at the end of product life? How should benefits of reclamation
aluminium are combined to make new products. This stage is and recycling be quantified?’
of particular interest to designers, as it capturers a wide range
of operations (such as casting, cutting, assembly and finishing)
Extraction Production Co-products Use End of Life
necessary to transform a relatively raw material into a wide range
of products. It is also, in the case of aluminium, the stage with primary Al use energy Waste
Ignot Mgmt &
potentially the greatest environmental impact. In production, Mining bauxite Refining alumina Smelting
Casting Semis Recycling
Manufac-
aluminium is often combined with other materials that contain Ignots manufac- semis turing
final
product Use Collection
recycled Al turing
their own extraction and supply chain impacts. The production Anode
Production Remelting Sorting &
dross
stage also includes packaging and any transportation necessary & Refining Treatment
to the manufacturing supply chain. Interrogation of this stage new scrap new scrap old scrap
Landfill
seeks to answer the questions: ‘By what processes is the product scrap
made? What are the impacts associated with those processes?’

Co-products
Other raw materials Other Materials / Product Systems
Fig 2.7 Simplified visualisation of the cradle to grave life cycle of aluminium products. Only primary processes and flows
are shown in this diagram for ease of visualisation

Recycling and Recycled Content in Aluminium Building
Products
MATERIAL FLOW ALUMINIUM FLOW
Modelling the benefits of recycling is particularly difficult for metals Bauxite1 366
Alumina2 143
like aluminium that may be repeatedly recycled, as the recycling Primary Aluminium Stock 8
process creates a linkage between diverse product lives. Metals, Total Products in Use
such as aluminium, do not experience significant product losses in Since 1888
1149
the use stage nor degrade during the recycling process, and their Semis-fabricated Final
Primary Ingots 163 Products 104 Products 91
properties do not change between primary and recycled material. Production
75
It is estimated that during the remelting process, approximately Net Addition 59
Remelted
1-2% of material is lost, primarily due to oxidisation (Das et al. 2010). Al 88
Recycled aluminium requires up to 95% less energy to produce Recycled Other
Al 33 Applications5
than primary metal and produces only 5% of the greenhouse gas 3
emissions (IAI 2009), as the most energy-intensive processes are
related to refining and smelting (IAI 2013a).
Dross and Fabricator Traded New Old Scrap 20
Scrap3 59 Scrap4 14
As discussed in further detail in Report Two of this series, titled
Bauxite Residue Metal Losses 4 Recovery and Disposal6 5 Under Investigation7 3
Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling, recycling aluminium and Water 224
is both efficient and cost effective. Reclaimed and recycled
aluminium are valuable commodities with robust markets and
industry processes that facilitate collection, processing and the Fig 2.9 Global aluminium mass aluminium material availability (Rombach 2013). This is particularly
flow, 2020
full movement of reclaimed materials back to market as ingots, relevant in the building and construction sectors, as the service
extrusion billets or new rolling slabs. Since savings in energy are also life span for aluminium components can be particularly long
often savings in cost, economic incentives support very high global 60 (>50 years). Larger components tend to have the longest service
reclamation rates and also significant environmental benefits (van lives, creating a lengthy delay between demand for aluminium in
55
Houwelingen 2004, Das et al. 2010). construction and availability of aluminium scrap from buildings for
50
recycling. For a more extensive discussion of this topic, see Report
Approximately one third of European Union aluminium demand is Two Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling.
met through recycled sources, and nearly all aluminium products 45
are made with some percentage of recycled aluminium, a quality How should architects and engineers regard recycled content and
40
that fluctuates with product requirements, global and local scrap the environmental benefits of aluminium recycling? If aluminium is
(million tonnes per year)
availability, market demands, and sector constraints. The recycled 35 almost infinitely recyclable, should the environmental impacts of
aluminium
content of aluminium products can vary by location, segment, its manufacturing be assigned to a singular use, and if so, how?
30
application and time due to a number of factors, including
economic history, construction and demolition practices, As aluminium retains its qualities and value over multiple uses,
25
and geopolitics. European products produced today have a the distribution of environmental impacts from primary aluminium
comparatively high recycled content due to the availability of 20 production must be equitably and consistently shared between
scrap aluminium from a large number of older buildings that are these uses. For the purpose of LCA models, two primary
15
now undergoing demolition or refurbishment, as well as access methodologies are used in the building and construction sector for
to mature scrap markets and technologies and mature product 10 allocating the impacts and benefits of recycling between products
markets, such as castings for use in transport, (Rombach et al 2012, (Atherton 2007, Leroy et al. 2012, EAA 2013, PE International 2014).
5
IAI 2014). Each approaches credits for the benefits of recycling slightly
0 differently, placing emphasis on a different part of the product
While including recycled content in aluminium products is cost 1950 1980 2007 life. The result is a shift in the boundary being drawn between the
effective and environmentally beneficial, manufacturers are various lives of the material.
constrained by the availability of scrap as the global demand for Fig 2.8 Global demand for
aluminium met from
aluminium far outweighs the availability of recycled aluminium. primary (red) and recycled
These two methodologies, known as the Recycled Content (Cut-
Even with the assumption of 0% growth in aluminium demand, aluminium (orange) in Off) Method and the End-of-Life Recycling (Avoided Burden)
1950, 1990, and 2007 (data
recycled content of aluminium will not exceed 40% globally before based on IAI 2009) Method, will be explored in Chapter Four: Modelling Recyclability
2050, as recycled content is limited in large part by recycled & Recycling.

THREE
life cycle assessment of window framing

26 life cycle assessment of window framing life cycle assessment of window framing 27
Life Cycle Assessment of Window Framing
The following chapters in this report contain a series of modelling installation, and discount the effects of use, replacement and
studies, using comparative Life Cycle Assessment to explore key end-of-life scenarios on the environmental impacts over the life
issues in the environmental impacts of building materials. The three cycle of a building (Asif 2002, Sinha & Kutnar 2012, Salazar &
case studies focus on: Recycled Content and End-of-Life Recycling Sowlati 2008).
scenarios; service life, maintenance and durability; manufacturing
inputs and service life sensitivity analysis. All three LCAs make use of While some attention has been paid to the energy performance
a simple and common architectural component, window framing, of window assemblies, window framing, and curtain walling over
as the object of comparison, allowing for exploration of multiple time (Sinha & Kutnar 2012, Kim 2011, Citherlet 2000), few studies
materials and assembly techniques. adequately examine use-stage impacts or consider the effects
of window frame repair, replacement, recycling or disposal.
Why Windows? Additionally, existing literature on window framing and façades
Windows present unique challenges and opportunities. They singles out embodied energy as the primary environmental metric
represent under-studied, complex assemblies that contribute both worthy of study, with the effect of excluding other impacts. By
to the embodied environmental impacts of building components contrast, this comparative study aims to expand discussion of the
and also to their energy performance. Window framing is available role of use-stage and end-of-life impacts on total environmental
in a variety of base materials, for example metals, woods, plastics, accounting of window framing assemblies and to more accurately
and composites, each with their own attributes and design display the material attributes and design consequences of
requirements. The four assembly types considered in this study materials such as aluminium, wood, and PVCu.
allow for a thorough exploration of several critical questions in
the use of life cycle environmental impact characterisation on Recently, a comparative LCA commissioned by the European
material selection, detailing and design considerations. Aluminium Association and Schüco (Mösle 2015) have expanded
the range of questioning to examine window framing as part
Windows constitute an important and relatively costly building of a holistic evaluation of environmental, social, and economic
component. Composed of several materials and sub-assemblies, variables. In the EAA/ Schüco study, window framing is examined
they play a significant role in the performance, appearance and for its contributions to the sustainability of a full building system,
use of a building over time. While a building may have a total life and is functionally defined by its performance in relationship to
of more than a hundred years, most window framing assemblies floor area. The study herein expands on that work by focusing
do not last as long, requiring maintenance and replacement on direct comparison of the environmental impacts of window
throughout the life of a building. Each framing type investigated in assemblies in isolation from variables of the larger system, such as
these case studies has complex, but manageable life histories - all thermal comfort and building energy demand. While metrics such
of which factor into the decision-making of designers and building as full-building energy performance and aesthetics are indeed
managers when making purchasing and detailing choices. From important, they require design and site-specific analysis that allows
maintenance costs and incremental replacement, to recycling them to be tied to larger system considerations rather than a single
credits and regional sourcing, a wealth of questions can be component or assembly such as window framing material.
explored through this seemingly simple component.
The design and specification of window assemblies are not, of
Literature exploring window framing or other complex architectural course, the only factors affecting the total environmental impacts
components from an environmental impact perspective is of a building. However, glazing assemblies remain an essential
sparse. While a small number of LCAs for window framing have component of building design - and they warrant detailed study.
been conducted, the majority of assessments have approached Far from attempting to place a single impact score on a material
window framing as an object or product, rather than an assembly assembly, the case studies in this report delve into focused
playing a sustained and essential role in a larger building system. questions about materials and assemblies that directly influence
Such studies tend to count only materials contained in the first design decisions.
Fig 3.1 Frame types (top to
bottom): aluminium,
wood, aluminium-clad
wood, PVCu
Process
Material
Aluminium,
scrap Transport to
recycling plant
Remelt, Polymers
refining & pigments
Aluminium,
Aluminium, scrap to
secondary Window remelt
hardware
Ingot Aluminium, Section bar Powder
Aluminium, production mix Crushed glass
primary casting extrusion coating Other recycling
treatments Steel
Glazing
Chromium
steel 18/8 Fasteners
Cutting & sealants
Cold rolling framing
Reinforcing members
steel
Transport
Metal Frame Window to site Window Material Cleaning & Building Waste collection Transport Landfill or
adhesives assembly assembly installation replacement maintenance demolition & sorting incineration
Raw Raw
Materials Transport Materials Transport
Mining Processing
Synthetic
rubber
ABS, Polyamide
injection moulding
Weatherproofing
& sealing
BUILDING USE END OF LIFE
Polyamide
Glass fiber Construction

reinforced plastic waste
RAW MATERIALS Material
off-cuts
EXTRACTION
& PROCESSING PRODUCT MANUFACTURING CONSTRUCTION
(Factory Assembly) (Site Installation)
MANUFACTURING & CONSTRUCTION
Fig 3.2 Life cycle stages (ISO 14040) and system boundaries for a typical aluminium window frame
LCA Methodology
The following chapters use the methodology below to conduct System Boundaries and Delimitations
comparative Life Cycle Assessments on window framing. The analysis accounts for the full life cycle of each window, including
Chapters Four and Five compare assemblies of aluminium, wood, material manufacturing, use and maintenance, and eventual end
aluminium-clad wood, and PVCu window frames. Chapter Six of life. Window frame assemblies include primary frame material
focuses only on variables in aluminium product manufacturing and and all additional materials - gaskets, internal hardware, sealing,
therefore models only aluminium window frames. Any deviation or coating and finishing - required for assembly and installation up to
elaboration on the methodology is discussed within each chapter. a 1% cut-off factor by mass, with the exception of known chemicals
that have high environmental impacts at low levels. In these cases
Goal and Scope Definition
a 1% cut-off was implemented by impact.
The primary objectives of the following Life Cycle Assessments are:
• To explore key issues in the environmental impacts of building Manufacturing of window frames is distinct per frame material.
materials through the use of a common architectural component The production of wooden and aluminium-clad wooden frames
in order to offer insight that is transferable to more complex building includes cutting, profiling, finishing, plugging and stopping, joining
systems.
and fitting of pieces. PVCu window frame production includes
• To compare the total environmental impacts of multiple material moulding and plastic extrusion, cutting and welding of plastic
choices and assembly techniques in order to understand the members, and aluminium section bar extrusions. Aluminium
impact of design decisions beyond building-level energy efficiency.
window frame construction includes the extrusion and anodising of
• To identify the variables within the life cycles of window frames that aluminium, section bar rolling of steel, material finishing and sealing
have the greatest influence on the total life cycle environmental
(Weidema 2013). Background data, including impact of electrical
impacts of the assemblies.
energy and other raw materials processing for production, are
Functional Unit included in the respective inventory figures.
The functional unit of the study is a window frame required to
Transportation - from manufacturing location to construction
produce 1 m2 of visible glazing, with similar thermal performance
site and from construction site to processing site for disposal or
(U-values between 1.5 and 1.6 W/m2K), over a building life span of
recycling - is assumed to be highly variable and not particularly
80 years. A sensitivity analysis was also undertaken with building life
impactful, but it remains an important step in the product life cycle
spans ranging from 40 to 100 years in Chapter Six.
and was included and tested with a standard uncertainty analysis.
Studied Objects
End-of-life impacts and credits were modelled using a disposal
The study compares four window frame types: aluminium, wood, scenario generated to reflect the collection and processing of
aluminium-clad wood, and PVCu. Galvanized steel and other
construction and demolition [C&D] disposal streams (Doka 2007,
less common framing types are outside of the scope of this
Weidema 2013), and as described further in Report Two. In the
study. Glazing is not included in the frame assembly as it can be
modelled scenario, several materials are diverted for recycling,
considered to be equivalent across window types.
including paper (85%), glass (94%), aluminium (90%), steel (75%),
PET (80%) and PVC (20%). In the case of aluminium and plastics,
While calculating environmental impact of various materials and
collection rates are based on European averages (Doka 2007)
processes during the extraction and production stages is relatively
and reflect sector-specific collection rates (IAI 2014, VinylPlus 2014).
straightforward, inclusion of differential use-stage impacts of
window frames in an assumed building within a cradle-to-grave
Material recovery rates (i.e. post-collection rates) are based on
LCA is much more difficult. To normalize for performance and
global industry averages (Weidema 2013). Of the remaining
to assure functional equivalence over the building lifetime, all
materials not diverted for recycling, 88% (by mass) were assumed
window assemblies have been designed to yield similar energy
to be sent to incineration and 12% sent to landfill, in accordance
performance (air-to-air heat transmission value) and visible light
with European averages (Weidema 2013). Materials such as wood
transmission. The reference window size for all assemblies is: 1.6 x
and PVCu, for which a significant amount of energy is generated
1.3 m2 with a visible frame surface of 0.45 m2 in the case of metal-
during incineration, received a credit for the avoidance of energy
clad, PVCu, and wooden frames, and 0.48 m2 for the aluminium
generation that they offset through reuse. Further documentation
window (Weidema 2013).
of waste and disposal scenarios can be found in the appendix.
Window Framing Assemblies
The study compares four window frame types: aluminium, wood,

aluminium-clad wood, and PVCu. All frame assemblies include
primary frame material, coatings (paint, polyurethane, powder
coating), any necessary weather stripping material, gaskets or
sealants. The material quantities for each window assembly are
documented in detail in the appendix.
Aluminium Frame
The aluminium window framing assembly consists of four primary
parts: frame, hardware, the weather sealing and finish. The entire
assembly weighs 50.7 kg. The frame portion of the assembly is ASSEMBLY INGREDIENTS
made of anodised aluminium, extruded plastic, and reinforcing Aluminium
steel, as well as the packaging and processing required for those Adhesive for metals
materials. Reinforcing steel
FRAME
Chromium steel
Aluminum Frame: Aluminum Frame: uPVC Frame: uPVCFrame: Wood/aluminum Frame:
Composition by Mass (kg) Contributions to Global Warming Potential Composition by Mass (kg) Polyethylene, HDPE
Contributions to Global Warming Potential Contributions to Global Warming Potential
(kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq) Nylon 6 (kgCO2 eq)
Isopropanol
1% 1% 1%
3%
HARDWARE
4% 8% 9% 7%
11% 9% 12% Chromium steel 6%
6% Aluminium
5% Glass fibre9%
reinforced plastic
Frame
WEATHER
Hardware Glass fibre reinforced plastic
SEALING
80% 90%
83% Synthetic rubber 78%
WS 90% 87%
Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene [ABS]
Coatings
FINISH
Frame Hardware WS Coatings frame Anodising
Frame Hardware WS
Fig 3.3 Aluminium frame: Fig 3.4 Aluminium frame:
hardware frame frame
composition by Mass (kg) contributions to total
weather sealing
Global Warming Potential hardware hardware
of assembly
(kg CO2 eq) for initial
coating weather sealing weather sealing
Wood/aluminum Frame: installation Wood Frame: coating
coating
Composition by Mass (kg) Composition by Mass (kg)
1% 1%
1%
5%
10%
23%
Fig 3.5 Aluminium casement window detail: section detail and ingredients list
75%
84%
uPVC Frame:
Composition by Mass (kg)
1%
Wood Frame
9%
The wood window framing assembly consists of a frame, hardware,
weather sealing and a urethane paint finish. This assembly is
significantly heavier than the aluminium frame, weighing in at
106.2 kg. Embodied in this assembly are the processes for kiln
drying the wood, timber
90% sawing, joining, fitting, surface finishing, ASSEMBLY INGREDIENTS
hardware production, and all the transportation associated with
production stages. It is assumed that the frame is made primarily Sawn timber
from softwood, with hardwood making up only 1% of the wood Aluminium
components by volume (Weidema 2013). In accordance with 1-butanol
general European production processes, scrap wood is assumed Acetone
Frame Hardware WS
to be collected and recycled as wood pellets. Titanium dioxide
FRAME
Toluene
Isopropanol
um Frame: Wood Frame: Wood Frame:
Methyl ethyl ketone
arming Potential
Composition by Mass (kg) Contributions to Global Warming Potential
Propylene glycol
O2 eq) (kgCO2 eq)
Benzimidazole-compounds
Alkyd resin, 70% in white spirit
1%
Melamine formaldehyde resin
5%
3% 14%
10%
Aluminium, cast alloy
Steel, low-alloyed
HARDWARE
Frame Zinc, primary material
16%
Copper
84% Hardware
Polyvinylchloride [PVC]
67%
78% WS Polyethylene, LDPE
Polypropylene
Coatings
WEATHER
SEALING
Synthetic rubber
frame Fig 3.6 Wood frame: composition Fig 3.7 Wood frame: contributions Nylon 66
Frame Hardware WS
by Mass (kg) of assembly Coatings to total Global Warming
hardware frame
Potential (kg CO2 eq) for
weather sealing hardware
initial installation
coating weather sealing Alkyd paint, 60% in H2O
FINISH
coating White spirit
Acetone
Fig 3.8 Wood casement window detail: section detail and ingredients list
1%
4% 9%
11%
Aluminium-clad
5% Wood Frame
The aluminium-clad wood window framing assembly is similar to
that of the wood window framing assembly, with the addition of
aluminium extrusions cladding
80% the exterior face. This assembly, 90%
weighing 111.1 kg, is slightly heavier than the wood window frame
due to the addition of the aluminium cladding. The aluminium- ASSEMBLY INGREDIENTS
clad wood window framing assembly is finished with a polyester
powder coating on the aluminium face and a painted interior Sawn timber
wood
Frameface. Hardware WS Coatings
Aluminium
Frame Hardware WS
1-butanol
Acetone
Titanium dioxide
uPVCFrame: Wood/aluminum Frame: Wood/aluminum Frame: Wood Frame: Wood Frame: Toluene
FRAME
Composition by Mass (kg)
bal Warming Potential Contributions to Global Warming Potential Composition by Mass (kg) Contributions to Global Warming Potential Isopropanol
(kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq)
Methyl ethyl ketone
% 1% 1% Wood pellets
1%
Propylene glycol
7% 5% Benzimidazole-compounds
3% 14%
6% 10% Alkyd resin, 70% in white spirit
9% Melamine formaldehyde resin
23%
16% Aluminium, cast alloy

75% Frame
84% Steel, low-alloyed
HARDWARE
67%
78% Hardware Zinc, primary material
87%
Copper
WS
Polyvinylchloride [PVC]
Coatings Polyethylene, LDPE
Polypropylene
e Frame Hardware WS Coatings frame
Frame Hardware WS Coatings
hardware frame
ware Fig 3.9 Fig 3.10
WEATHER
Aluminium-clad wood frame: Aluminium-clad wood frame:
SEALING
composition by Mass (kg) of weather
contributions to sealing
total Global hardware Synthetic rubber
her sealing
assembly coating
Warming Potential (kg CO2 weather sealing Nylon 66
ng eq) for initial installation coating
Alkyd paint, 60% in H2O
FINISH
White spirit
Acetone
Fig 3.11 Aluminium-clad wood casement window detail: section detail and ingredients list
PVCu Frame
The PVCu window framing assembly is unique in that it does not
include any paint or coatings for the frame, as PVCu is generally
left unfinished. This assembly is the second-lightest (heavier than
the aluminium frame assembly) at 91.3 kg. The frame assembly
includes the necessary reinforcing metals as well as the plastic
components and metal hardware. Manufacturing includes
formulation of plastics, injection moulding extrusion, assembly and
welding of framing members.
Frame: uPVCFrame:uPVCFrame: Wood/aluminumWood/aluminum
Frame: Frame: Wood Frame:Wood Frame:
ming
al Potential ContributionsContributions
to Global Warming
to Global
Potential
Warming Potential ContributionsContributions
to Global Warming
to Global
Potential
Warming Potential ContributionsContributions
to Global Warming
to Global
Potential
Warming Potential
eq) (kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq) (kgCO2 eq)
1% 1% 1% 1%
ASSEMBLY INGREDIENTS
7% 7%
9% 9% 12% 12% 3% 3%14% 14% Polystyrene
6% 6%
Polyethylene, LDPE
FRAME
9% 9% Polyvinylchloride [PVC]
Aluminium
16% 16% Steel, low-alloyed
Frame 67% 67%

Steel, low-alloyed
HARDWARE
83% 78% 78%
90% 90% 87% 87%
Aluminium, cast alloy
Hardware
Copper
WS Zinc, primary
frame frame Chemicals, organic
WEATHER SEAL-
Fig 3.12 PVCu frame: composition Fig 3.13
by Mass (kg) of assembly
frame PVCu
frameframe: contributions
to total Global Warming
hardwarehardware frame Polypropylene
frame
g hardwarePotential
hardware (kg CO2 eq) for
weather sealing
weather sealing hardware hardware
ING
initial
weather sealing
weatherinstallation.
sealing Synthetic rubber
coating coating weather sealing
weather sealing[PVC]
Polyvinylchloride
coating coating
coatingPolystyrene
coating
Fig 3.14 PVCu casement window detail: section detail and ingredients list
Impact Categories Data Sources
Environmental impacts were calculated using the U.S. For the purpose of comparison of results across window types, the
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] Tool for the Reduction life cycle inventory data used in this study represent global industry
and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts averages (Weidema 2013) for each of the four framing types.
(Ryberg et al. 2014). In the assessment, six impact categories
were tracked, in accordance with industry harmonization efforts: The LCA model was built using SimaPro, a professional LCA
global warming potential, ozone depletion potential, acidification modelling software. Life cycle inventory data used for this
potential, eutrophication potential, photochemical smog creation assessment came from the Ecoinvent database (Weidema, 2013).
potential and depletion of fossil energy resources (PE International Window assemblies and material quantities are based on a dataset
2014). The metrics by which these are measured are explained collected by the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science
in the table below. Human and environmental toxicity results are and Technology (EMPA) that covers manufacturing practice for
not reported due to very high levels of statistical uncertainty in the high-performance windows manufactured in Switzerland and
underlying life cycle inventory methodology and characterization. Germany between 1996 and 2004. It is the stated assumption of
EMPA that the dataset is relevant for European manufacturing
The impact categories in TRACI allow for the quantification of practices.
environmental burden associated with typical stressors, such as
chemical emissions to air and water or fossil fuel use. The method For all sub-materials contained in an assembly, regional or global
used by TRACI characterizes such impacts at the midpoint, production mixes have been used to best represent typical industry
measuring the environmental system change, such as a depletion practice rather than the performance of any one manufacturer
of the ozone, rather than the endpoint, for example increased or manufacturing location (Weidema, 2013). Data has not been
rates of skin cancer and crop damage, in order to minimize the adjusted to reflect regional differences in the models in Chapters
amount of uncertainty associated with forecasting the effects of Four and Five. All changes made to manufacturing production
environmental system change (Bare 2002). mixes are explicitly stated in Chapter Six.
Global warming kg CO2 eq Potential global warming based on chemical’s radiative forcing The documentation for the original window frame entries in the
potential and lifetime, based on the potency of greenhouse gasses relative Ecoinvent database differentiates specific quantities of metals,
to CO2.
plastics, and composite materials used for production of frames,
Ozone depletion kg CFC-11 Potential to destroy the protective ozone layer in the earth’s fittings, sealing, and coating. Hence, custom assemblies were
eq stratosphere due to harmful emissions like chlorofluorocarbons, created to represent ‘recoating’, ‘resealing’, and ‘replacement
halons, etc. Equivalencies are based on chemical’s reactivity
and lifetime.
of hardware’ for each frame type in order to generate nuanced
maintenance and replacement regimes. Likewise, waste
Photochemical kg O3 eq Potential for the creation of ground level ozone due to the scenarios were adjusted from Ecoinvent’s database to represent
smog formation interaction between nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic
scenarios for disposal of materials such as replacement hardware,
compounds (VOCs) resulting in human health and ecological
impacts. fittings, and weather proofing applied during the use stage for the
purposes of maintenance and replacement. Waste scenarios were
Acidification kg SO2 eq Acidification includes the processes that increase the acidity of
also adjusted to reflect different reclamation practices in the third
water and soil systems by releasing [H+] or equivalents.
LCA model in this report, Chapter Six: Modelling Manufacturing.
Eutrophication kg N eq Potential to cause eutrophication measured as a product of
nutrient factor (relative strength of influence on algae growth in
aquatic ecosystems) and transport factor (probability that the
release arrives in the aquatic environment in which it is a limiting
nutrient).
Resource MJ Depletion of non-renewable fossil fuels. The present model

depletion includes a non-site-specific characterization of fossil fuels sources
(fossil fuels) and use.
Fig 3.15 Impact categories reported according to TRACI 2.1 characterization scheme (Data based on EPA 2012)
FOUR
modelling recyclability & recycling

44 modelling recyclability & recycling modelling recyclability & recycling 45
Modelling Recyclability & Recycling
How do different LCA methodologies model the recycling of Life Cycle Assessment are the Recycled Content Method, also
aluminium, wood, aluminium-clad wood and PVCu window known as the Cut-Off Method and the End-of-Life Recycling
framing? Which is the most suitable for understanding the Method, also known as the Avoided Burden Method. The Recycled
complete life cycle environmental impacts of building assemblies? Content Method is recommended by several national standards,
including EN15804, while the End-of-Life Recycling Method is
These questions arose during the investigations initiated in Report recommended by ISO standards and the ILCD Handbook. Each
Two of this series, Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling. modelling practice is internally consistent, but represents a
different view of the relationship between primary and recycled
Recycled Materials in LCA aluminium (as well as other materials) by focusing on either the
Recycled materials, by definition, are materials connected to more recycled content going into the product stream, or the recovered
than one product or assembly. Recycling, the process of preparing material coming out (Frischknecht 2010).
a material so that it can be reused or refashioned, represents the
cyclic stage of product life. Many industrial materials, such as The differences in approach are expressed by the location of the
plastics and chemicals, are produced from the by-products of system boundary. The Recycled Content Method allocates all
other processes or other saleable products, and materials such as impacts for resource extraction and refining to the first life of the
aluminium can be processed and repurposed with very little waste material and only the impacts for recycling to the production stage
while retaining the material properties of the original material. Such of the recycled material. By contrast, the End-of-Life Recycling
interconnectedness between products and product lives presents Method adds credits for environmental benefits resulting from
a challenge for Life Cycle Assessment, as a boundary needs to be end-of-life recycling, which reduces the need for virgin material in
drawn to separate the processes and inputs of one material use the next use of the material. In practical terms, this means that for
from another (Atherton 2007, PE International 2014). the Recycled Content Method, recycled content of the material
in question is the key indicator of environmental impact, while for
When examining the topic of recycled content in metals, this is the End-of-Life Recycling Method, the recycling rate at the end of
a particularly tricky subject, as one must make decisions about product life is the key metric.
how to allocate the impacts associated with initial manufacturing
and extraction between the potentially infinite uses and re-uses NAME OF SCENARIO 1: RECYCLED CONTENT SCENARIO 2: END-OF-LIFE RECYCLING
of a highly recyclable material. In LCA terminology, allocation APPROACH
refers to the method by which the impacts connected to one or
more products, assemblies, or services may be divided. Particular Alternate names Cut-Off Method Avoided Burden Method
challenges arise when determining how to allocate the benefits Key indicator of Recycled content Recycling rate at end of life
and process impacts of recycling between products with a share environmental
of primary and recycled material. impact
System boundary Cut-off rule applied on recycled materials exiting Includes impacts of the recycling processes
the system (analysis looks only at the single
As the impacts associated with primary and recycled aluminium
product use)
have dramatic differences in their carbon footprint and other
Who gets the Recycling benefit given to the product using Recycling benefits given to the product
environmental impact indicators, see Chapter Two for further
benefits? recycled materials providing material for recycling
discussion, there are clear environmental and economic benefits
to utilizing recycled content. The question that remains is how to Who carries the First use receives the burden of materials First use receives credit for avoiding demand of
burden? (primary and recycled); recycled materials primary material; recycled materials now carry
best allocate environmental impacts, especially in determining at end of life do not carry energy or process impacts for energy and process of recycling
which use should receive the credit for savings associated with burdens
recycling. Indications for Promotes the consumption/use of recycled Promotes the production/preservation of
policy materials recyclable materials
There is presently a high variability in how recyclable building
components are modelled in terms of allocation and end-of-life
Fig 4.1 Recycling credit allocation method comparison
impacts. The two primary approaches to recyclable materials in

Many studies have shown that the selection of allocation method methodologies to building assemblies in an attempt to determine
has a major influence on model results. Yet there has been much which is more suitable for understanding the environmental
debate over which method is most appropriate in LCA (Frischknecht impacts of building products and materials.
2010, Hammond & Jones 2011, Trenton 2012), particularly with
respect to metals, which do not change their properties between Description of Approach
primary and further uses and where availability of scrap is limited. This model uses LCA as a tool to compare aluminium, wood,
aluminium-clad wood, and PVCu windows using the two
The Recycled Content approach is particularly difficult to apply allocation methods described above to determine which method
in the case of aluminium (Atherton 2007, Liu and Müller 2012, more accurately depicts the material attributes and design
PE International 2014). It requires precise knowledge of the consequences of product choices. The model is run to represent
percentage of recycled content by mass in an assembly, which an 80-year building life. The windows are assumed to have a basic
may be difficult to determine when availability of scrap is variable maintenance regime, in which a building manager or owner
and scrap is incorporated in aluminium production melts with no follows commonly prescribed maintenance practices aimed
change to performance properties (EAA 2013, Schlesinger 2013, at reaching a longer lifespan for the window while maintaining
Puga 2009). On the other hand, using the End-of-Life Recycling a high level of window performance. Depending on the frame
approach may be inaccurate in predicting reclamation rates type, maintenance practices (described in the appendix) may
and impacts of recycling at the end of life when the product include refinishing and periodic replacement of damaged or
lifetime is longer, such as in a building (Hammond & Jones 2011)– worn out components, such as weather stripping, sealants,
especially since recycled aluminium’s high economic value gaskets, or hardware, at regular intervals. Questions of variability
incentivizes increased recycling rates and improved technology in maintenance practices and useable life are explored further
development. In light of this uncertainty, it is standard practice to through modelling in Chapter Five: Modelling Durability and
construct models that utilise current recycling recovery data as a through case studies in Report One of this series, Aluminium and
credible baseline, even though recovery methods may be more Durability.
or less efficient in the future.
Scenario 1 uses the Recycled Content Method to allocate the
The metals industry has recommended that the End-of-Life full burden of production to the first life of the material and only
Recycling Method is more appropriate for discussions involving the considers the impacts of the recycling process for the share of the
recycling of metals in order to promote net global conservation product that is from recycled sources. In this scenario, aluminium
of material and resources rather than directing limited recycled assemblies are modelled with a mix of 67% primary aluminium and
feedstock towards specific products (Atherton 2007). However, 33% recycled aluminium from a mix of old and new scrap (EAA
others have suggested that differences in LCA results using the 2013). While higher recycled content blends could be achieved,
two methods may point to one method being more useful for this scenario aims to represent a typical commercially available
comparative LCA across materials and the other when using
LCA as an industry-specific, policy-influencing tool (Ekvall 2001,
Primary Recycled Material
Wardenaar 2012, Huang 2013). In part, this may be explained Material Content
using a window frame assembly example. Aluminium (or any
other highly recycled material) – retains its high value and physical Product Product
properties in future uses of that material while the other window
framing materials under comparison do not necessarily retain their
End of Life End of Life Recycling
primary material properties after recycling and may benefit more
from focusing on the recycled content used in production of the
assembly. Total Impacts Total Impacts
Scenario 1: Recycled Content Scenario 2: End of Life

Through the following model comparing window framing
assemblies, LCAs are used to explore the application of these two
Fig 4.2 Diagrams describing the allocation methods used for the Recycling
Content and End of Life Allocation methodology

European aluminium window. Other regions would likely have a Results
window with lower recycled content, an issue discussed in Chapter The results clearly indicate that the choice of allocation method
Six Modelling Manufacturing. has a significant impact on the magnitude of environmental
impacts the model associates with the material in question.
Scenario 2 employs the End-of-Life Recycling Method, giving
Using the Recycled Content Method (Scenario 1), greater focus
credit for future recyclability and reclamation by passing the
is placed on the avoidance of virgin material, as manufacturing
environmental impacts of the initial production to subsequent
and construction inputs make up a large portion of the overall
uses. This gives the credit for recycling to the product of study
environmental impacts. Using the End-of-Life Recycling Method
for avoiding the impacts that would have been associated with
(Scenario 2), greater focus is placed on material recovery at the
a product made of entirely virgin material. All assemblies are
end of product use, as materials receive credit for being able to
modelled using end-of-life disposal scenarios tuned to present
replace virgin material in their next use. This makes PVCu appear
product selection, construction, and demolition/waste diversion
significantly better across all categories under the Recycled
and recycling rates. Aluminium, steel, paper and plastics receive
Content Method than it does under the End-of-Life Recycling
credits associated with materials diverted from the waste stream
Method.
and recycled at end of life, while wood products receive
credit from energy recovery associated with incineration. In this The difference in results for aluminium between scenarios is striking.
methodology, the specific recycled content is not measured, as While aluminium is never the most impactful option in Scenario 1,
this would constitute double counting. it is only the least impactful in two of the six categories. However,
in Scenario 2, aluminium is the least impactful choice across all
For all frame assemblies, a disposal scenario was generated that
categories by a wide margin, never contributing more than a third
is representative of the collection and processing of construction
of the impacts of the highest impact option, PVCu, and generally
and demolition [C&D] disposal streams (Doka 2007, Weidema less than half the impacts of its closest competitor. This change can
2013). In this disposal scenario, materials are diverted for recycling, be predominantly attributed to the credit received for avoiding
including: paper (85%), glass (94%), aluminium (90%), steel (75%), the impacts of manufacturing associated with primary material
PET (80%) and PVC (20%). In the case of aluminium and plastics, processing. As these are the life cycle stages with the largest
collection rates are based on European averages (Doka 2007) environmental impacts in the aluminium life cycle, allocation of
and reflect sector-specific collection rates (IAI 2014, VinylPlus these impacts has a dramatic effect on the net impacts of the
2014). Further documentation of waste and disposal scenarios can material assembly.
be found in the appendix.
Aluminium-clad wood frames also benefit from a shift to
While there is variability in the effective rates of recycling, per Scenario 2. They are the most impactful in all categories except
geography and material application, these conservative baseline Acidification using the Recycled Content Method. However, they
figures were deemed sufficient for a comparison of methods. The are the second-best choice across all categories except for Fossil
significance of variation in recycling rates is explored further in Fuel Depletion when analysed using the End-of-Life Recycling
Chapter Six: Modelling Manufacturing. Method. This is most likely due to the dramatic difference in
environmental impacts for the aluminium cladding of the frame,
All remaining materials not diverted for recycling are then
which experiences the same benefits of environmental impact
modelled using a waste processing typical of European averages,
reduction as the primarily aluminium frame.
with 88% of material sent to incineration and 12% sent to landfill
(Weidema 2013). Materials such as wood, for which there is energy When comparing each material to itself between the Recycled
generated during incineration, receive a credit for the avoidance Content Method (Scenario 1) and End-of-Life Recycling Method
of energy generation that they offset as well as the burden for the (Scenario 2), it is useful to consider the change in numerical value
impacts of the incineration. of the results in order to understand how the benefits of recycling
are being considered. The largest changes were seen in aluminium
across all categories except for fossil fuel depletion.

Scenario 1: Recycled Content In particular, aluminium saw a reduction of 51%, 42%, and 39% in
RECYCLED CONTENT METHOD eutrophication, ozone depletion, and acidification, respectively,
100% when the allocation method switched from Scenario 1 to Scenario
90% 2. Aluminium also dropped in the global warming potential
80%
category by 38%. PVCu, on the other hand, was the only category
70%
to perform more poorly across all categories under Scenario 2. In
60%
particular, PVCu increased in the fossil fuel and ozone depletion
50% Aluminium
categories by 59% and 40%, respectively.
40% Wood
30% Aluminium-Clad
20% PVCu Although most of the categories measured a reduction in

10% embodied impacts for the majority of material assemblies in
0% Scenario 2, each assembly had an increase in fossil fuel depletion.
GLOBAL WARMING OZONE DEPLETION SMOG ACIDIFICATION EUTROPHICATION FOSSIL FUEL
DEPLETION
Aluminium increased the least (5%), with aluminium-clad wood
and wood framing having an equivalent increase (10%) and
Fig 4.3 Comparative LCA results for each of the window assemblies in Scenario 1(Recycled Content Method) 1200
across TRACI 2.1 impact categories PVCu increasing the most (59%). This increase can be attributed
to the inclusion of end-of-life processes and impacts for recycling,
including the transportation of materials, such as to and from the
recycling plant.
Discussion
Scenario 2: End of Life
Although each scenario indicates that there are significant
END OF LIFE METHOD
100%
disparities between the environmental impacts per framing
90% materials, the model results also demonstrate the magnitude
80% of differences in results between the End-of-Life Recycling and
70% Recycled Content methods. These differences point to two
60% distinct approaches to design decision-making in the building and
minium
50% construction sector.
d
40%
minium-Clad
30% Evaluation of window framing materials and other complex
u
20% assembly types, through methods that account for the full
10%
life cycle, creates the possibility for designers, consumers and
0%
RGEL OCBYA LCWLAERDM I NCGOONZ OTNEE ND ETP LM
E T IE
ONT H O D SMOG ACIDIFICATION EUTROPHICATION FOSSIL FUEL
manufacturers to make responsible and informed decisions about
DEPLETION material selection and ongoing design development.
Fig 4.4 Comparative LCA results for each of the window assemblies in Scenario 2 (EoL Method)
across TRACI 2.1 impact categories For highly recyclable materials such as aluminium, the emphasis
nascent in each allocation method may promote particular
practices in the industry, manufacturing, and design decision-
making. As discussed in Chapter Two, the amount of recycled
content currently available for aluminium products is constrained
Aluminium
because demand for scrap is higher than supply due to the long
Wood lifetime of aluminium building products and the growing market
Aluminium-Clad for aluminium. For materials such as PVCu that can be recycled
PVCu but presently have low collection rates and low market demand
for recycled material, the system understanding highlighted in the
End-of-Life Recycling Method may lead to increased efforts to
promote material reclamation and recycling pathways in order to
TION SMOG ACIDIFICATION EUTROPHICATION FOSSIL FUEL
reduce environmental impacts (Atherton 2007).
DEPLETION
1200
Scenario 1: Recycled Content
Scenario 2: End of Life
G l ob a l Wa rmi n g Pot e ntial Ac idif ic at io n

1200 6
1000 5
800 4
kg SO2 eq
kg CO2 eq
600 3
400 2
200 1
S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2
0 0
Fig 4.5 Comparing the results of Fig 4.8 Comparing the results of
ALUMINIUM WOOD ALUMINIUM- PVCU Scenario 1 to Scenario 2 for Scenario 1 to Scenario 2 for
ALUMINIUM WOOD ALUMINIUM- PVCU
CLAD Global Warming Potential Acidification impacts CLAD
O zon e Dep l et i on E u t r o ph ic at io n
8.0E-5 4
7.0E-5 3.5
6.0E-5 3
kg CFC -11 eq
5.0E-5 2.5
kg N eq
4.0E-5 2
3.0E-5 1.5
2.0E-5 1
1.0E-5 0.5
0.0E+0 0
ALUMINIUM WOOD ALUMINIUM- PVCU ALUMINIUM WOOD ALUMINIUM- PVCU
Scenario 1 to Scenario 2 for Scenario 1 to Scenario 2 for
CLAD Ozone Depletion impacts Eutrophication impacts CLAD
F o s s il F u e l De ple t io n
S mog F orma t i on
1400
60
1200
50
1000
40
MJ Surplus
800
kg O3 eq
30
600
20 400
10 200
0 0
ALUMINIUM WOOD ALUMINIUM- PVCU ALUMINIUM WOOD ALUMINIUM- PVCU
Scenario 1 to Scenario Scenario 1 to Scenario 2
CLAD 2 for Smog Formation for Fossil Fuel Depletion CLAD
(photochemical oxidants)

The Recycled Content Method promotes the consumption and
use of recycled materials, encouraging designers to focus on
obtaining products with as high a recycled content as possible.
While this may allow one building to appear more sustainable
than another because of a particularly high content of recycled
aluminium, the global balance will remain the same, as demand
for recycled content already cannot be fully met. In essence,
this approach encourages designers to play a global game
of musical chairs, in which one project may demand higher
recycled content in its aluminium supply, but can only do so at
the expense of another project. For other materials, an increased
desire for recycled content may indeed increase competitiveness
in circumstances where material recycling does not provide the
same inherent financial savings to manufacturers.
Alternately, the End-of-Life Recycling Method promotes the

production and preservation of recyclable materials, as the
environmental benefits for recycling are given to the product
providing the recycled material. Instead of encouraging designers
to focus on their material source, this approach encourages life
cycle thinking by privileging material reclamation, persuading
designers to consider deconstruction and disassembly processes
as an important part of sustainable practice when designing
building details and assemblies. While it is difficult to predict precise
benefits of reclamation and recycling after a long-life aluminium
product is integrated into a building, such as in the structural
system or curtainwall, this uncertainty may be quantified thorough
application of sensitivity analysis using multiple recycling scenarios
(EAA 2013). Placing the onus on designers to design for recovery
for the benefit of the whole value chain is discussed further in
Report Two of this series, Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling.
Fig 4.11 Demolition and material sorting. Philadelphia, PA, USA

FIVE
modelling durability
58 modelling durability modelling durability 59
Modelling Durability
How does material durability and maintenance/replacement described in Chapter Two, which leave out the question of use
strategies associated with aluminium, wood, aluminium-clad phase impacts entirely. This trend can, in part, be explained by
wood and PVCu window framing affect a window frame’s total the difficulty of approximating an accurate service life for window
environmental impact over the lifetime of a building? Which framing - a long-life product whose replacement can hinge on
elements of window framing assemblies contribute the most to a number of factors, from aesthetics to performance to user
environmental impacts? needs. However, when examining material use on buildings that
must achieve high performance standards for 80-100 years, the
These questions arose during the investigations initiated for Report assumed service life of a component such as window framing does
One of this series, Aluminium and Durability. matter, as a single full replacement of an assembly will effectively
double the product’s life cycle impacts.
LCA as a Tool for Assessing Durability
For many LCAs conducted on building materials or products, A first impact approach can create results that fail to account
use stage examinations have focused exclusively on operational for the potentially significant impacts of maintenance and
energy. Questions of maintenance practices and material replacement activities, while also failing to credit materials for
replacement have been insufficiently addressed in LCA work their durability and long life spans. Due to lack of available data,
due to the difficulties associated with quantifying the benefits of it has also become accepted practice for most academic LCAs
physical properties such as durability (Liu and Müller 2012). to utilise service life figures from standard product guarantees, a
practice that may skew results and disadvantage materials such
For windows, questions of durability and material replacement are as aluminium for which observed, in-place service life may be
particularly significant. Framing assemblies, described in Chapter much higher than modelled, as observed in Report One of this
Three, are composed of a number of materials serving different series, Aluminium and Durability.
purposes and subjected to varying stresses and wear. Therefore,
the act of window refurbishment and replacement is a significant The consequence of material replacement also varies across
and meaningful part of the building life cycle - and a growing material types depending on the percentage of environmental
topic of interest for high-performance building design and retrofit. impacts attributed to various components and activities, such
as the frame, hardware, weather sealing, and refinishing.
In published literature, the majority of LCAs conducted for Wholesale replacement is particularly significant for aluminium
window frames have focused on the manufacturing and end- window frames made of primary aluminium, as they may have a
of-life impacts as stand-alone products with no specified service greater environmental impact during their manufacturing stages
life (Sinha & Kutnar 2012, Asif et al. 2007, Lawson 1995) or have than PVCu or wood, yet their durability and low maintenance
shortened model timeframes to 40 or 50 years, so that they do requirements may improve their comparative environmental
not include significant maintenance or material replacement. impacts when viewed from a building life cycle perspective.
Average
Additionally, Lifetime
most EPDs Range for Aluminium assessments,
are cradle-to-gate Products as Wood window frames may have a low embodied environmental
Years (per sector) impact up to the point of installation because of the minimal
environmental impacts from manufacturing, yet this frame type
Packaging has far more intensive maintenance regimes in order to protect
Other and preserve the material.
Engineering
While it is indeed difficult to overcome the uncertainty of selecting
Transport (Cars and light trucks) a single assumed service life for an assembly without fully
understanding the building context and maintenance regime,
Transport (Other) comparative LCA facilitates the exploration of this topic through
the testing of multiple use scenarios. This approach recognizes
Buildings and Construction Materials Fig 5.1 Estimated average use
phase ranges for aluminium that the choice of maintenance regime may vary based on
products in years (data geographic location, maintenance budget, or building type, and
based on IAI 2015)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 that LCA results will vary based on the selection of maintenance

practice. Because comparative LCA enables comparison across incremental maintenance requirements based on the physical
the full lifespan not only with regard to materials but between relationships between components. This methodology is consistent
maintenance practices as well, it is useful as an aide in operational with an approach to maintenance scenarios that maintains
decisions during the building use stage or as an additional factor in functional equivalence across assembly types and practices
component comparison during building design. based on consistent window performance throughout the full
building life cycle.
This comparative study aims to expand discussion of the role of
service life and use-stage impacts on total life cycle environmental Replacement Rates and End-of-Life Modelling
impacts of window framing assemblies and to more accurately Useful life and replacement cycles for components and full
display the design consequences of material selection. assemblies are difficult to pin down for building materials, as
numerous factors lead to the replacement, recycling, or disposal
Description of Approach
of window assemblies and their sub-components. In addition to
In order to tease out the significance of use-stage decisions, inherent material qualities and specific approaches for design and
such as the frequency of maintenance, repair, and replacement detailing, a multitude of additional factors–from building type and
cycles, this comparative LCA examines aluminium, wood, ownership to economics, aesthetics and natural disasters–can
aluminium-clad wood and PVCu windows using three different result in assemblies being discarded much earlier or far later than
use scenarios associated with different maintenance regimes. The their originally expected lifespan. For more detailed case studies
comparison of multiple service life assumptions gives a range of on aluminium disposal, refer to Report Two of this series, Aluminium
results for each material assembly, effectively providing a realistic Recyclability and Recycling.
basis for comparison of material durability despite the uncertainty
associated with assuming a single potential service life. In order to test quantitatively the significance of durability in the full
life cycle of window framing, three use scenarios were developed
Use scenarios were run by separating initial material inputs from that seek to represent a range of potentials grounded in the
additional materials associated with maintenance, repair, and full material attributes and typical maintenance practices for each
frame replacement. The model uses an incremental allocation
methodology to account for periodic component replacements
associated with failure and wear rather than a pre-emptive, timed SCENARIO 1: GUARANTEE SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3
(little to no maintenance) (low maintenance, shorter life) (high maintenance, longer life)
replacement of whole frames across a building. This methodology
estimates the usual cycles of repair and maintenance of individual Anodised 25 yrs. : Full frame No cleaning of frames Annual cleaning of frames during
Aluminium replacement 20 yrs. : Replace weather window cleaning
components of the window framing assemblies on a percentage sealing 20 yrs. : Replace weather sealing
basis rather than assuming a complete assembly replacement, 2%/yr: Replace hardware 2%/yr: Replace hardware
60 yrs. : Full frame replacement + 80 yrs. : Full frame replacement
as the components of a window require maintenance and
replacement at different rates based on the model assumptions Painted Wood 20 yrs. : Full frame 12 yrs.: Repaint when coatings 8 yrs.: Repaint and treat wood on
replacement have failed regular basis to prevent failure
of maintenance and repair. For example, if the weather stripping 15 yrs. : Replace weather 15 yrs. : Replace weather sealing
or opening hardware on a given window in a school or office sealing 2%/yr: Replace hardware
2%/yr: Replace hardware + 80 yrs. : Full frame replacement
building becomes worn out, it is far more likely that the particular 30 yrs. : Full frame replacement
component will be replaced or fixed, rather than prompting
Aluminium-Clad 20 yrs. : Full frame No refinishing
the replacement of every window in the building. Incremental Wood replacement 15 yrs. : Replace weather Not viable due to inability to
allocation therefore acts as an averaging out of maintenance sealing protect wood through additional
2%/yr: Replace hardware maintenance.
activity across multiple windows and allows for common estimating 30 yrs. : Full frame replacement
practices, such as: after a certain period of time, 2% of windows
PVCu 20 yrs. : Full frame No refinishing
will require hardware replacement in any given year. replacement 15 yrs. : Replace weather Not viable due to inability to
sealing prolong life span of primary
2%/yr: Replace hardware material.
Additionally, allocation of environmental burdens to each 30 yrs. : Full frame replacement
component allows for the model to approximate realistic system
behaviour for the specific maintenance scenario by considering Fig 5.2 Maintenance activities for aluminium, wood, aluminium-clad wood, and PVCu window frames

YEARS
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 full assembly window frame assembly. The goal of these scenarios is not to find
frame
the correct service life of a window, but rather to demonstrate
ALUMINIUM weather sealing the range of full life cycle impacts based on realistic use-stage
S1 coating
1x Initial frame
assumptions (RSMeans 2012).
2x Full assembly
replacement Weather Scenario 1 represents the most conservative estimate of window
Sealing Thermal
S2 1x Initial frame Barrier life; it assumes that no significant repair or replacement activities
2x WS replacement are conducted and that the entire frame assembly is disposed of
0.3x Full assembly Frame
replacement or recycled and replaced at the end of a typical manufacturer
guarantee. As there is presently little consensus on true service
S3 1x Initial frame Hardware
3x WS replacement lives for architectural products, guarantees are commonly used
in published comparative LCAs of window frames, even though
WOOD they do not represent a realistic portrayal of in-situ circumstance.
S1
1x Initial frame
Scenario 2 describes a basic maintenance regime in which a
3x Full assembly
replacement typical building manager or owner follows commonly prescribed
S2 maintenance practices aimed at reaching a longer life span for
the window while maintaining a high level of window performance.
1x Initial frame Depending on the frame type, maintenance practices, see Figure
1.66x Full assembly
replacement 5.3, may include periodic replacement of damaged or worn
2.66x WS replacement components or hardware at regular intervals, and refinishing of the
4.3x Recoating
framing material. Scenario 2 matches the use stage assumptions
S3 that were used in Case Study 1 (Chapter Four).
1x Initial frame Fig 5.4 Thermally broken
4.33x WS replacement aluminium window framing
Scenario 3 describes a high-maintenance regime in which a
9x Recoating assembly components
building manager or owner follows best practices aimed at
extending the lifespan of a high-quality window through regular
ALUMINIUM CLAD and frequent maintenance practices. For wood assemblies, this
S1 includes regular recoating and refinishing of frames, while for
aluminium, maintenance includes annual cleaning of the external
1x Initial frame frames. The use scenario also considers regular replacement and
3x Full assembly repair of hardware, weather stripping, or sealants as would be
replacement
S2
expected over time per assembly type to maintain thermal and
1x Initial frame moisture performance.
1.66x Full assembly
replacement
PVCu 2.66x WS replacement All assemblies are modelled using end-of-life disposal scenarios
tuned to present construction and demolition waste diversion and
S1
recycling rates. Aluminium, steel, paper and plastics receive credits
1x Initial frame
3x Full assembly associated with materials diverted from the waste stream and
replacement
recycled at end of life, while wood products receive credit from
S2
1x Initial frame energy recovery associated with incineration. End-of-life scenarios
1.66x Full assembly have been adjusted from those used in the previous study to
replacement
2.66x WS replacement account for the initial material inputs of additional materials used
for maintenance of parts and components during the use stage.
End-of-life modelling utilises the End-of-Life Recycling Method as
Fig 5.3 Replacement cycles for window frame components over building lifetime per scenario recommended by ISO standards and the ILCD Handbook (ILCD
2010, ISO:21930 2006) and described in Chapter Four.

Results support expected lifespans of greater than 30-40 years, as the
The results of the LCA model clearly indicate that there are design and detailing of such windows prevents maintenance
significant differences between the embodied environmental regimes that actively preserve the wood base, such as retreating or
impacts of window framing materials, even in the base case. recoating wood, as one would with solid wood window assemblies.
Additionally, the large variation between results across use While the end-of-life disposal scenario assumes that metal
scenarios within each frame type also indicates that both the cladding could be stripped from wooden frames and recycled at
durability and useable life assumed for window framing assemblies a typical diversion rate for aluminium building products, much of
are significant, and should be the subject of further research. For the impacts from the full assembly are tied to the manufacturing of
aluminium window framing, the differences between use scenarios the wooden frame and additional co-products, all of which would
are striking. Between the most conservative aluminium framing be sent to landfill or incineration upon disposal, yielding higher
scenario (S1), which takes the guarantee period as an estimate environmental impacts than for the aluminium framing assembly.
of useable life, and the least conservative scenario (S3), there was
Analysis of impacts by life cycle stages reveals differences in the
a 52% decrease in the calculated global warming potential and
role of primary frame material - aluminium, wood, aluminium-clad
a 45% decrease in calculated fossil fuel depletion, indicating that
wood or PVCu, relative to necessary co-products associated with
studies that utilize guarantee periods as a means of estimating
sealing, coating, weather proofing and hardware, which may be
service life may be more than doubling their estimate of global
replaced at faster rates during the full life of the building.
warming potential and other impacts for this product.
While the end-of-life scenarios used in the model consider material

For other assemblies, like wood window framing, variations in
recovery, including diversion of demolition material from landfills
durability of frame material (or shorter replacement cycles)
for either recycling or incineration, not all materials benefit equally
were not as significant. For example, between scenario 1, with
from recycling in assessments of embodied environmental impacts.
full replacement of the all-wood window frame after 20 years,
Aluminium, with its high recovery rates, robust scrap market and
and scenario 3, in which the frame lasted for the full 80-year life
efficient recycling mechanism, receives significant credits in LCA
cycle of the building, there was only a 13% difference between
calculations using the End-of-Life Method, which awards credits
assessments of global warming potential and a 9% increase in
to the assembly studied for reducing the pressure for primary
eutrophication impacts for wooden window framing. This reveals
aluminium in future products. Since metals such as aluminium
that a high proportion of such impacts is tied to maintenance
can easily be recycled for use in new products, the end-of-life
activities such as painting and refinishing rather than the initial
approach rewards products not for their recycled content, but for
manufacturing, production or disposal of the base materials.
their recyclability at end of life, emphasizing the cyclical nature
While these environmental savings of increased maintenance
of such materials. Material losses and burdens associated with
may seem small, there are also economic and labour savings that
recycling activity are included in the model assessment.
support the higher maintenance regime.
PVCu windows receive some credits at end of life, but the credits
Other framing assemblies, such as PVCu, however, do not
are very small when compared to manufacturing stage impacts.
benefit as clearly from increased maintenance activity over long
Current low recycling rates for plastics, coupled with potential
time frames due to the relative instability of the base material
material integrity loss in recycling, make PVCu window framing
and conventional detailing - making high durability scenarios
a less attractive option, though increase in waste diversion and
unfeasible.
material reclamation for plastics in construction would decrease
Aluminium-clad wood framing is similarly challenged from a long- their relative impacts.
life perspective, as the composite nature of the assembly poses
difficulties for durability. Present data for typical frames do not

Scenario 1: Guaranteed Service Life
Scenario 2: Basic Maintenance
Scenario 3: High Maintenance
AC I DI F I C AT I O N
GLOBA L WA RMIN G POTENTIAL
AC I DI F I C AT I O N
G LO
Gl obBA
a l LWa
WA RMIN
rmi ng G POTENTIAL
Potential 8 Ac
ACidif icFat
I DI I Cio
ATnI O N
1400 GLOBA L WA RMIN G POTENTIAL
Fig 5.5 LCA results for each of the 8
1400 window assemblies and 8
1200
1400 6
use scenarios across TRACI
1200
1000
1200 2.1 impact categories. 6
SO2 eq
Scenario 3 was not a vi- 6
eq 2 eq
1000 4
800
kgeq
1000 able option for Clad Wood
CO
eq
2 2
eq
SOSO
800 or PVC, and is therefore 4
600
2 2
800
kg
CO
not represented 4
kg kg
kgkgCO
600 2
400
600
400 2
200
400 2 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2
S3 S1 S2
S1 S2 0
200 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2
2000 ALS1UM I NI
S2 UMS3 S1 WS2
O O DS3 AL US1M I NI
S2UM - S1
P VC US2
S1 S2 S3 S1 WOOD
S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 0 S1 S2 S3
0 AL
S1UM INIUM
S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 A LUMINIUM-
S1 S2 PV CUS2
S1 S2 0
S1 S2 S3 S1C L AD
S2 S1 S2
0 CLA D AL UM I NI UM WOOD AL U M I NI UM - P VC U
AL UM INIUM WOOD A LUMINIUM- PV CU AL UM I NI UM WOOD AL U MC LIAD
NI UM - P VC U
AL UM INIUM WOOD A LUMINIUM- PV CU
CLA D C L AD
CLA D
E U T R O P HI C AT I O N
OZO N E DEPLET ION
E U T R O P HI C AT I O N
O ZON E DEPLET IO N
1.00E-04 Ozon
OZO NeE Dep l et iION
DEPLET on 3.5 E uEtUr o
T Rph
OPicHI
atCio
ATnION
1.00E-04
1.00E-04 3.5
3
8.00E-05 3.5
8.00E-05 2.53
eqeq eq
8.00E-05 3
6.00E-05
eqN eq
kg CFC-11
2.5
2
6.00E-05 2.5
CFC-11
6.00E-05
N kg
kgkgCFC-11
4.00E-05 1.52
N eq
2
kg kg
4.00E-05 1.5
4.00E-05 1
2.00E-05 1.5
2.00E-05 0.51
2.00E-05 1
0.00E+00 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2
0.5
0
0.00E+00 S1 S2 S3 S1 WOOD
S2 S3 S1 S2 S1PV CUS2 0.5 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2O O DS3 S1 I NIS2UM - S1
0.00E+00 AL
S1UM INIUM
S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 A LUMINIUM-
S1 S2 S1 S2 AL UM I NI UM W AL UM P VC US2
0 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1C L AD
S2 S1 S2
WOOD CLA D PV CU
AL UM INIUM A LUMINIUM- 0 AL UM I NI UM WOOD AL UM I NI UM - P VC U
CLA D AL UM I NI UM WOOD AL UMC LIAD
NI UM - P VC U
CLA D
C L AD
F O S S I L F U E L DE P L E T I O N
SMO GF orma
Smog F ORMA T ION
t i on F o s s il F u e l De ple t io n
F O S S I L F U E L DE P L E T I O N
SMO G F ORMA T ION F O S S I L F U E L DE P L E T I O N
70 SMO G F ORMA T ION 1600
70 1600
60
70
MJ Surplus
1600
60 1200
50
60
Surplus
1200
eq03 eq
Surplus
50
40
50 1200
800
kgkg030eq
MJMJ
kg
40
3
30
40
800
30 800
20
30 400
Wood
20
10
20 400
Wood
400
CladWood
S1 S2
Clad
10 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2
10 0 0
S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1PV CUS2 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 I NIS2UM -
W O OS3 S1
P VC US2
Clad
0 S1UM INIUM
AL S2 S3 S1 WOOD
S2 S3 A LUMINIUM-
S1 S2 S1 S2 0 AL UM I NI UM D AL UM
0 S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S3 S1C L AD
S2 S1 S2
WOOD CLA D PV CU 0
AL UM INIUM A LUMINIUM- AL UM I NI UM WOOD AL UM I NI UM - P VC U
CLA D AL UM I NI UM WOOD AL UMC LIAD
NI UM - P VC U
CLA D
C L AD

Discussion
Results of the Life Cycle Assessment have shown the full cradle-
to-grave impacts of aluminium window framing to be far less Aluminium PVCu Aluminium/wood Wood
than previously reported by other studies. When the lifespan of S1 S2 S3 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S3

aluminium products are considered across the building’s life, the Global Warming
5.99E+02 3.38E+02 2.87E+02 1.42E+03 1.06E+03 9.12E+02 6.95E+02 7.41E+02 7.29E+02 6.46E+02
global warming potential of a moderately maintained aluminium (Kg CO2 Eq)
window assembly is 68% less than PVC and 50% less than the best Ozone Depletion
4.30E-05 2.30E-05 1.92E-05 1.00E-04 7.43E-05 6.45E-05 4.68E-05 5.27E-05 5.01E-05 4.28E-05
(Kg CFC-11 Eq)
case scenario for aluminium-clad wood. Well maintained wood
Smog
windows were found to have a 7% lower impact from a carbon 2.87E+01 1.47E+01 1.20E+01 7.26E+01 5.37E+01 6.07E+01 4.38E+01 5.50E+01 5.13E+01 4.26E+01
(Kg O3 Eq)
perspective than the long-life scenario for aluminium-clad wood Acidification
2.80E+00 1.41E+00 1.15E+00 7.96E+00 5.72E+00 5.20E+00 3.77E+00 4.54E+00 4.25E+00 3.52E+00
framing, and to have a nearly 30% lower impact than aluminium- (Kg SO2 Eq)
clad wood windows when the manufacturer guarantee period Eutrophication
1.71E+00 8.41E-01 6.80E-01 3.82E+00 2.77E+00 3.34E+00 2.41E+00 2.92E+00 3.17E+00 3.18E+00
is used as an estimation of actual life cycle. However, when (Kg N Eq)
considering fossil fuel depletion impacts, moderately and well
Fossil Fuel Depletion
7.34E+02 4.60E+02 4.03E+02 1.76E+03 1.34E+03 8.67E+02 7.07E+02 6.87E+02 6.82E+02 6.04E+02
maintained aluminium windows (scenarios 2 and 3) required less (MJ Surplus)
energy to produce and maintain over their lifetime than any of
the wood scenarios.
Fig 5.6 LCA results for each of the window assemblies and use scenarios across TRACI 2.1 impact categories.
Model results are for 1 m2 of window framing over an 80-year building life span, inclusive of materials
Well maintained aluminium window framing proved to be the manufacturing, use (replacement and maintenence), and end of life
least impactful option across all categories, in large part due to
the credits delivered at end of life from recycling aluminium into
future building products. Therefore, while this model was initially
Accurate and definitive predictions of durability are challenging
built to measure the importance of durability and maintenance in
and rely on a range of context and design specific factors, some
the use stage of the life cycle, it has become clear that material
of which are explored in Report One of this series, Aluminium
reclamation and recycling at end of life is the most significant
and Durability. Local climate, installation quality, architectural
contributor to reducing the embodied environmental burdens of
detailing, occupant behaviour and owner expectations can have
window framing products.
significant effects on the actual lifespan of a product or assembly
when installed in a real building. While increased data on realised
Admittedly, not all materials and assemblies are affected equally.
product lifespans will help in creating more grounded estimates,
Aluminium window frames in particular are adversely affected
project-specific factors will always drive individual cases, making
when life cycles stages are simplified or assessment periods are
it difficult to clearly and consistently identify a typical building for
shortened to exclude the benefits associated with durability, low
use in modelling. In light of this uncertainty, use scenarios provide
maintenance requirements or end of life (EAA 2013). The very
a means of testing our assumptions and understanding the
attributes that contribute to the relatively high impacts of initial
relevance of factors such as durability.
frame production cited in several existing studies (Sinha & Kutnar
2012, Asif et al. 2007, Lawson 1995) contribute to decreased
impacts incurred during the product life cycle. Just as a first-cost
model can hide long-term costs incurred by maintenance and
replacement, LCAs that ignore the use stage or focus on recycled
content rather than robust end of life modelling may unintentionally
misrepresent the full environmental impacts of products.

SIX
modelling manufacturing
72 modelling manufacturing modelling manufacturing 73
Modelling Manufacturing
How does variability in the production of aluminium used in product life. The recycling rate for aluminium in building products
building products and assemblies affect estimates of life cycle is an especially difficult variable to study, in particular because
environmental impacts? Which manufacturing processes of a lack of hard data on local practices for reclamation, which
g
contribute the most to environmental impacts of aluminium vary from project to project and region to region based on
products? Within those processes, what is the variability and the societal commitment and processing technologies available
source of such variability? (Liu and Müller 2012). For data on specific case studies exploring
rates of recycling and reclamation, see Report Two of this series,
Variability in Manufacturing Aluminium: Recyclability and Recycling.
The primary aluminium value chain begins with bauxite mining
followed by refining of bauxite to produce alumina, then the The global average collection rate for aluminium from construction
energy-intensive electrolytic reduction of alumina into liquid and demolition (C&D) disposal streams is estimated to be 86%, with
aluminium, followed by ingot casting and shaping through rolling Western Europe averaging 95%, China 92%, and North America
c yc ling
or extrusion into semi-finished and finished products. In the case 80% (IAI 2014).
of aluminium window framing assemblies, a cast aluminium
While such recycling rates are relatively high, a function of
billet is extruded to produce profiles. These profiles (or extrusions)
the value of aluminium scarp and its massive uses in the built
are then cut, joined with other aluminium and non-aluminium
environment, the availability of scrap is limited by the fact that such
components, formed and finished as final products. Each of the
uses have long lifetimes and so the aluminium currently available
processes for creating the finished product transforms energy
for recycling reflects what went into the built environment 20, 30,
and consumes resources, but smelting dominates this energy and
50 or 100 years ago. Thus, when discussing the viability of utilizing
resource requirement, indicating that sustainability efforts should
high recycled content aluminium, it is important to consider the
focus on this portion of the supply chain (albeit that no subsequent
quality of available scrap and its geographic location, given that
processing can occur without the smelting process).
mature markets are likely to have the most available scrap while
As discussed in previous chapters of this report, the smelting requiring fewer inputs than newly built cities, such as those in China
of aluminium is an energy intensive activity. However, there is or the Middle East.
also variability between individual plants and regions in which
aluminium is produced. Within the manufacturing and production
of aluminium products, the largest sources of variability from plant
to plant are the power source of the electricity used and the energy 5% Energy Saved
intensity of the electrolytic process (Liu and Müller 2012). The latter by Recycling
can be attributed to global technology and efficiency variations, Aluminium
which are broadly a function of age of operations. Although the
Energy Used
variation in energy intensity has straightforward implications for in Recycling
environmental impact, the impacts from the change in power Aluminium
mix are less evident. In many cases, the power source utilized is
95%
geographically dependent on availability, and the power used
may be based on a mix of hydropower, gas, or coal-fired power
generation, if grid-based.
Given that recycling of aluminium requires only 5% of the process

energy of the primary material (IAI 2009), sustainability efforts may
also focus on increasing the reclamation rate at the end of useful Fig 6.1 Energy use for production of primary aluminium compared to
the production of recycled aluminium (data based on IAI 2009)

Almost 300 million tonnes of aluminium are currently in productive
use in buildings (IAI 2014), but this aluminium is not distributed
evenly across the globe. For example, Western Europe has
historically benefited from a larger volume of aluminium stored in
use and therefore creating a flow of high-quality scrap available
for recycling, while regions with newer urban development are
not able to draw from the same historical stocks of scrap. For
example, Europe has an estimated 160 kilotonnes of aluminium
in use (in all products) and recycled more than 3 kilotonnes of
post consumer scrap in 2013 (up from 1.6 kilotonnes in 2000) (IAI
2014b, unpublished). By comparison, South America has only 25
kilotonnes in use and collected less than one kilotonne in 2013 (IAI
2014d, unpublished).
However, developing countries are catching up in terms of in-use

stocks, as large populations increase their per capita consumption
of aluminium. For example, China now has close to 190 kilotonnes
of aluminium in use due to its recent construction boom, and has
significantly more old scrap available now (about 2 kilotonnes in
2013) than just fifteen years ago (approximately 500 thousand
tonnes in 2000) (IAI 2014c). Fig 6.2 Coal fired power station in Mehrum, Germany
Additionally, the aluminium collection rates from C&D disposal

The choice of power mix when conducting a Life Cycle
streams seem to have improved, along with the influx of available
Assessment is a controversial decision (Koch and Harnisch, 2002),
scrap, increasing from an estimated 80% in 2000 to 92% in 2013
generally leading LCA practitioners to default to using the annual
(IAI 2014, unpublished), according to expert opinion. This trend is
regional grid mix or industry-specific averages provided by the IAI
reflected globally: as the quantities of aluminium scrap increase
annual publications (IAI 2015b). This data source is also used for
and the infrastructure and markets to support this activity improve,
LCA practitioners doing attributional or consequential LCAs across
so do recycling rates.
space and through time. However, this generic substitute fails to
Previous LCA studies on the topic of environmental impacts from capture the complexity of the system, and may lead to an over
aluminium production have generally focused on particular or underestimate of environmental impacts, as many aluminium
processes within the life cycle, such as smelting (Norgate and smelters have their own specific power mix. This is particularly true in
Rankin 2001; Ootani et al. 2002; Tharumarajah 2008), or they locations that have access to hydropower, self-generating energy
have focused on specific environmental impacts, such as the capacity, or are co-located with power plants, where the use of
production of perfluorocarbons (IAI 2013b) or greenhouse average surveyed power mixes has been shown to introduce a
gas emissions (Norgate et al. 2007). Those taking a broader high degree of uncertainty and inaccuracy for specific products
perspective on environmental impacts of the production supply (da Silva et al. 2010).
chain have tended toward geographic specificity in order to
avoid the uncertainty associated with the geographic variations
in production discussed above and to position positively regional
production centres by studying primarily Europe, U.S., and
Australia (Tan and Khoo 2005; Norgate et al. 2007), which together
accounted for less than fifteen percent of global aluminium
production in 2013 (USGS 2015).

Waste
rubber
58.2 kg CO2
Description of Approach
Curbside Municipal
collection Waste
solid waste
75.7 kg CO2 74.3 kg CO2 plastic The comparative LCA models presented in this chapter further
14.6 kg CO2
Aluminium, Aluminium, Electricity,

narrow the scope of the previous two case studies to examine
C&D Waste Aluminium, Aluminium,
scenario
-716 kg CO2
primary,
ingot
primary,
ingot
primary,
liquid
primary,
liquid
medium
voltage the impacts of the primary variables of the manufacturing and
-382 kg CO2 -380 kg CO2 -41.2 kg CO2 -36.3 kg CO2 -22.5 kg CO2
disposal processes specific to aluminium. To this end, each model
Aluminium, Aluminium,
Electricity, limits the scope to a single aluminium window frame assembly so
medium
scrap, scrap,
Aluminium
waste post-
consumer
post-
consumer
voltage
-22.4 kg CO2 that the variables specific to aluminium processing can be directly
-792 kg CO2 34.2 kg CO2 24.6 kg CO2
compared between the scenarios, and their significance can be
Zinc Zinc,
12.1 kg CO2
primary
11.8 kg CO2
isolated. The technique of sensitivity analysis is used to compare
the relative impact of the manipulation of two of the variables
Aluminium
hardware,
replacement
Poly- Electricity, Electricity, associated with the production and end of life of aluminium.
ethylene, high high
22.9 kg CO2 high density voltage voltage
11 kg CO2 -22.4 kg CO2 -15.9 kg CO2
Aluminium
window Synthetic Carbon Carbon
Power Sources and End-of-Life Variability
Weather rubber
frame Synthetic black black
Sealing
replacement rubber 58.8 CO2
18.5 kg CO2 18.1 kg CO2 This set of comparative LCA models uses sensitivity analysis to
338 kg CO2 45.3 kg CO2 60.8 kg CO2
test the importance of reclamation rates and the power mix for
smelting to the overall environmental impacts of aluminium.
Section bar
extrusion
53.2 kg CO2
This mode of analysis uses the one-at-a-time [OAT] technique for
Electricity,
medium
Electricity,
medium
Electricity,
high
sensitivity analysis to understand the importance of each of the
voltage voltage voltage
Section bar 16 kg CO2 15.9 kg CO2 16.8 kg CO2 two parameters on either end of the life cycle with regard to
extrusion
53.2 kg CO2 overall aluminium assembly environmental impacts. This allows
for a better understanding of where the most productive efforts
Aluminium Anodising,
aluminium
Anodising,
aluminium
Electricity,
medium
Electricity,
medium
Electricity,
high
Electricity,
high
can be focused to make the life cycle more sustainable. The OAT
framing 65.4 kg CO2 voltage voltage voltage
1.05E3 kg CO2
72.9 kg CO2
25 kg CO2 24.9 kg CO2 25.1 kg CO2
voltage
24.2 kg CO2
approach is suggested when investigating local sensitivity analysis
for particular variables and parameters that are assumed to be
uncorrelated (Groen 2014) and may be used on small assembly
Aluminium Aluminium, Heat, district Heat, district
framing,
replacement
wrought or industrial or industrial systems. It requires selection of a subset of parameters or processes
311 kg CO2 18.5 kg CO2 13.4 kg CO2
244 kg CO2
within an assembly to manipulate within a selected range in order
to see how much influence the manipulation has on the result.
Aluminium
framing,
initial
741 kg CO2
Model 1: Energy Mix tests the sensitivity of the model to the power
KEY
source for smelting. A 1% cut-off by impact was used to draw a
material/ IMPACT study boundary around the processes considered. Because of
process
CREDIT Aluminium,
wrought
Aluminium,
wrought alloy
the difference in magnitude of impacts for primary and recycled
kg CO2 eq (RECYCLING)
790 kg CO2 27.8 kg CO2 aluminium, this cut-off excludes manipulation of the power sources
ASSEMBLY for any recycled material processing.
PROCESSING
MATERIAL Aluminium,
wrought The model is manipulated by changing the power mix from the
ENERGY 443 kg CO2
previous studies, which used a global aluminium industry average
DISPOSAL SCENARIO
Glass fibre Glass fibre Nylon 6-6, Nylon 6-6,
WASTE TREATMENT reinforced reinforced glass-filled glass-filled mix, to single-input power sources. It tests the three most commonly
MARKET
65.1 kg CO2 63.8 kg CO2 53.5 kg CO2 52.7 kg CO2
used power sources for aluminium processes: hydropower, natural
(INCLUDES TRANSPORTATION)
gas, and coal, which uses an 80% hard coal to 20% lignite mix
based on the aluminium industry global average (Weidema 2013).
Fig 6.3 Contributions to overall Global Warming Potential in the lifecycle of aluminium (Diagram based on SimaPro
network diagram, PRé Consultants)

400,000
300,000
200,000
Although in reality grid-powered aluminium smelters often use a 700,000
mix of power sources, the following model uses single sources of NUCLEAR 100,000
NATURAL GAS
power in order to clarify the contrast between the scenarios. OIL
600,000 COAL
HYDRO 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
While thermal energy sources in aluminium production processes
also vary according to geography, thermal energy is not 500,000
manipulated in this study for reasons of clarity and materiality. While
smelting electricity contributes 70% of the energy requirement of
400,000
global primary aluminium production (mining to casting), direct
thermal energy contributes less than 20%; the remainder is made
up of transport energy and the energy required for ancillary 300,000
material production (IAI 2014).
Model 2: Recycling examines the importance of end-of-life 200,000
assumptions, using three aluminium recycling and reclamation

rates for projects: 80%, 90%, and 95%. As this change is made to NUCLEAR 100,000
the model, the percentage of overall impact is examined to see NATURAL GAS
OIL
if the change in the recycling rate results in the expected linear COAL
0
change to each of the environmental impacts. For this model, the HYDRO
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
global aluminium industry average power mix from the previous
chapters is used. Fig 6.4 World primary aluminium smelting power mix, 1980-2013 (data based on IAI 2014a)
End-of-life modelling in each instance utilizes the End-of-Life

Recycling Method as recommended by ISO standards and the
ILCD Handbook (ILCD 2010, ISO:21930 2006) and described in
Scenario 2 in Chapter Four. In order to test these parameters under
WORLD
common practice, this model assumes the use stage maintenance 14,560
of Scenario 2 in Chapter Five: a basic maintenance regime in
which a typical building manager or owner follows commonly
prescribed maintenance practices aimed at reaching a longer
lifespan for the window while maintaining a high level of window
performance. The details of the aluminium framing assembly are
described in Chapter Three. EUROPE
NORTH AMERICA ASIA (EX
15,519 CHINA)
15,584
The credits for recycling in this chapter assume that the material 14,749 CHINA
GCC 13,740
re-enters the production stream in the global market. This is 14,817
particularly important in Model 1, as the recycling credit assumes AFRICA
the avoided primary material would have been produced using 15,534
the global average energy mix, rather than the energy mix used in
SOUTH AMERICA
the production of the modelled product. 15,694
OCEANIA
14,643
Fig 6.5 World primary aluminium smelting energy intensity, in kilowatt hours per tonne of aluminium (data
based on IAI 2014a)

Results Gl o b a l W a rm i ng Po t e n t ial
800
Ac idif ic at io n
5
As expected for the power mix variation test described in Model 1: 700
4
Energy Mix, the selection of power source has a large effect across 600
3
all impact categories. The dramatic differences in environmental 500
impacts across the options show that selection of power source for 400 2
kg CO2 eq
300
kg SO2 eq
smelting is the action with the most environmental impact in the 1
200
aluminium life cycle. Hydropower, as the only renewable energy
100 0
option tested, yields by far the best results for an energy source in
0
all measures of environmental impact, even providing a net credit -1
-100
for avoided impacts in all categories except ozone and fossil fuel -200
-2
depletion. -300 -3
GLOBAL COAL HYDRO NATURAL GLOBAL COAL HYDRO NATURAL
AVERAGE GAS AVERAGE GAS
The results do not indicate a clear second-best power source from
the scenarios examined. Current global focus on climate change GLOBAL WARMING ACIDIFICATION
indicates that an increase in the use of natural gas would be
Oz o ne D e p l e ti o n S m o g F o r m at io n
preferable over scenarios using coal, as natural gas contributes 8.00E-05 50
only 42% of the global warming potential of coal. However, 7.00E-05 40

while natural gas also has excellent performance in the smog
6.00E-05 30
formation, acidification, and eutrophication categories, providing
a net environmental benefit for each, it has significantly worse 5.00E-05 20
kg CFC-11 eq
impacts in the areas of ozone depletion (five times greater than
kg O3 eq
4.00E-05 10
coal) and fossil fuel depletion (four times more than coal). Coal is
3.00E-05 0
the only energy source option that has zero categories for which
it provides environmental benefits, and it is the worst option with 2.00E-05 -10
regards to carbon emissions, smog formation, acidification, and 1.00E-05 -20
eutrophication.
0.00E+00 -30
GLOBAL COAL HYDRO NATURAL GLOBAL COAL HYDRO NATURAL
AVERAGE GAS AVERAGE GAS
In each case presented in Model 1, the performance of the
global average is rarely accurate for any single power source, as it OZONE DEPLETION SMOG FORMATION
reflects an industry average mix. As hydropower is used extensively
E utro p5hi c a ti o n F o 1600
s s il F u e l De ple t io n
in certain areas of the world but not at all in others, its inclusion in
the industrial global average energy mix reduces the apparent 4 1400
impacts of aluminium in many LCAs, as the default in LCA practice

3 1200
is to use the global mix. Similarly, using a global average fuel mix
1000
as proxy for a mix dominated by either hydropower, natural gas, or 2
MJ surplus
kg N eq
a combination thereof will underreport the benefits of aluminium, 1 800
as the global average mix is dominated by coal as a fuel source. 0 600

As coal is the only fuel source that has a significant harmful impact
-1 400
in the areas of smog formation, acidification, and eutrophication,
the use of the global average will fail to reflect the environmental -2 200
benefits in those categories associated with the use of the other -3 0

GLOBAL COAL HYDRO NATURAL
fuel sources. Ideally, when analysing the relative impacts of power GLOBAL COAL HYDRO NATURAL
AVERAGE GAS
AVERAGE GAS
mixes and manufacturing locations, it would be more appropriate
EUTROPHICATION FOSSIL FUEL DEPLETION
for designers attempting to evaluate climate impacts of aluminium
Fig 6.6 LCA results for each of the energy source scenarios in Model 1 across TRACI 2.1 impact categories.
Negative values are possible because recycling credit assumes the avoided primary material would have been
produced using the global average energy mix.

200
to use manufacturer- and location- specific data for products 0 G lo bal W ar m in g P o t e n t ial Ac idif ic at io n
80%
1200 90% 95% 8
they are using, such as that provided in Environmental Product
Impact
Declarations (EPDs), discussed later in this chapter. 7
GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL
1000
Credit for Recycling
6
In Model 2: Recycling, it is clear that while increased recycling
800
rates will have a direct improvement on environmental impacts, 5
the relationship is not always linear, and there is a reduction in the
kg CO2 eq
kg SO2 eq
600 4
rate of returns as the recycling rate increases in most categories.
For global warming potential, acidification, and eutrophication, 3
400
the relationship between the percentage change in recycling
2
rate is linearly reflected in the results, with a standard nine-tenths
200
of a percent change for every percent increase in recycling rate. 1
This relationship is very similar to that shown in smog formation 0 0
potential, which only begins to see a small decrease in returns Impact

80% 90% 95%
Impact
80% 90% 95%
between the 90% and 95% recycling rate from the standard nine- Credit for Recycling
GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL
ACIDIFICATION POTENTIAL
O z o n e De ple t io n S m o g F o r m at io n
tenths of a percent for each one percent increase. This indicates
6.0E-05
that there will be a continued decreasing rate of returns as the
70
recycling rate exceeds 95%, but additional study would be 60

5.0E-05
necessary to determine the rate of falloff.
50
4.0E-05
The relationship between recycling rate and decrease in ozone
depletion potential is also linear, but the effect is less strong: a 40
kg CFC-11 eq
kg O3 eq
3.0E-05
ten percent change in the recycling rate only leads to a seven
30
percent change in the ozone depletion impacts.
2.0E-05
20
Fossil fuel depletion is the impact category least affected by

1.0E-05
a change in recycling rate. The relationship is linear, but each 10
change in recycling rate by ten percent only yields a decrease

0.0E+00 0
of fossil fuel impacts by six percent. This is most likely due to the 80% 90% 95% 80% 90% 95%
Impact Impact
impacts associated with the recycling process itself, which requires Credit for Recycling
OZONE DEPLETION POTENTIAL SMOG FORMATION POTENTIAL
the use of thermal energy in order to process the reclaimed
E u t r o ph ic at io n F o s s il F u e l De ple t io n
material. 4.5 1000
4.0 900
800
3.5
700
3.0
600
kg N eq
MJ surplus
2.5
500
2.0
400
1.5
300
1.0
Fig 6.8 LCA results for 200
each of the
0.5
scenarios in Model 100
2 across TRACI 2.1

Fig 6.7 Collected aluminium scrap impact categories 0.0
80% 90% 95%
0
80% 90% 95%
Impact Impact
84 modelling manufacturing
EUTROPHICATION POTENTIAL
modelling
F O S S Imanufacturing
L FUEL DEPLETION 85
Discussion after they are no longer of use. This mentality is demonstrated in
The results of these models demonstrate the importance of the Design for Deconstruction, which is discussed in Report Two of this
decisions made at both the start and end of life for aluminium series.
building products. The dominance of the choice of power
The degree of importance associated with recycling implied by
source during the smelting process on environmental impacts
the model indicates that deconstruction of existing building stock
indicates that the power mix used in production prior to arrival of
should be done with careful attention paid to scrap metals. Not
the aluminium building product at a construction site is the most
only will this help increase the amount of aluminium available as
significant indicator of environmental impacts of the product.
recycled content for future aluminium use, it will also prevent future
In practice, this is directly related to the location from which
impacts of the demand for additional primary material, which is
the aluminium is sourced. The demonstration of a significant
shown in Model 1 to be the most energy-intensive and impactful
linear impact of reclamation rates on environmental impacts
stage of life for aluminium building components.
also emphasizes the importance of recycling to improving
environmental performance of aluminium building products.
Although design decisions are not directly related to the selection

of a power source for the smelting process, and global drivers of
location of smelting capacity will not be greatly influenced by the
design community, designers may implement the lessons learned
from the scenarios presented in Model 1: Energy mix through an
incorporation of EPDs in the specification writing process. EPDs
report independently verified LCA results in a standardized manner,
allowing for direct comparison across products. As the choice of
power source is such a major driver of environmental impacts for
aluminium, this choice is reflected in the impacts shown in an EPD.
Specifying a maximum allowable impact for an aluminium product
using an environmental performance specification for aluminium
products that can be verified using EPD information would likely
result in the selection of aluminium products manufactured using
cleaner fuel sources.
On the other hand, designers have the ability to immediately

incorporate the lessons shown in Model 2: Recycling directly
into the design process. The strong linear relationship between
recycling rates and reduction in environmental impacts implies
that designing for the highest possible degree of aluminium
material reclamation is not only beneficial from an economic
standpoint (because of the high value of scrap), but also from an
environmental standpoint, as each impact category experiences
significant reductions for each additional percent of aluminium
reclaimed. In design, implementing a high recycling rate requires
a life cycle mentality that not only considers how assemblies are
put together, but also how they may be efficiently taken apart
Fig 6.9 A coal fired power station

in Datteln, Germany

SEVEN
interim conclusion
88 interim conclusion interim conclusion 89
Interim Conclusion
Life Cycle Assessment is a powerful methodology that provides The LCA models in this report have shown that recycling rates
a scientific basis for comparing the environmental impacts of (collection and recovery) are a driving factor in the environmental
materials and processes. It renders intelligible the intertwined impact of aluminium building products. There is need for further
and layered flows of materials and energy over space and time, research on how design and construction decisions affect
allowing designers to move towards a quantifiable basis for making collection and recovery rates in practice. Additionally, factors
decisions regarding environmental impact and performance. related to regional variation in demolition practices are not
understood. Are market forces for high-value aluminium sufficient
LCA is also a complicated science, replete with confusing to assure optimum collection and recovery rates from buildings? Is
terminology, complex datasets and methodological snares. While there more that the aluminium industry and other actors along the
general life cycle thinking is a comfortable fit for designers who value chain can do?
think deeply about materials and their applications, the use of LCA
in design practice is relatively new. Few designers or engineers are From a modelling perspective, a shift from the Recycled Content
trained in the practice, and the industry is still in the process of Method to an End-of-Life Recycling Method in the building and
developing much needed standards to guide modelling practice construction sector should aid in steering designers toward goals
and interpretation. of material recovery rather than chasing after high recycled
content material.
The ultimate goal of this report is to foster discourse around the
quantification of the benefits of aluminium by establishing a The research also highlights the importance of power source
common knowledge base. Chapters 1-3 instruct this audience in used in the smelting of aluminium as another important factor
the core concepts of LCA and some of the essential topics relating influencing the total lifetime environmental impact of products.
to the use of LCA for the assessment of building products. The While actual energy consumption is well studied by manufacturers,
carefully curated LCA models presented in Chapters 4-6 provide a and both industry and regional averages are available, data is not
framework for interrogation of the building product system. These often available at a resolution that easily assists product selection
LCAs emphasize the environmental impacts related to different or differentiation at the product level. There is room for further
stages of product life and point to possible actions to reduce those research on sector-wide practices and reporting standards that
impacts associated with buildings and the built environment. could increase transparency regarding the energy mixes and
manufacturing impacts of aluminium smelting.
LCA, like any predictive modelling practice that projects
behaviour decades into the future, will always have to deal with As the building and construction industry deepens its
uncertainty and assumptions. For this reason, it is important to understanding and use of Life Cycle Assessment, Environmental
pair comparative models with real life case studies, such as those Product Declarations (EPDs) or other manufacturer-specific LCAs
presented in Report One and Two of this project. Just as a case may aid designers in making informed decisions about material
study may ground an abstract or idealized model, so too does and product selection. LCA will also provide a mechanism for
the rigor of data collection used in modelled averages allow for industry to communicate the unique attributes of their products.
the one-off nature of a single building to be extrapolated to larger
trends and findings.
The research presented in this report underscores the conclusion

that there is room for improvement across the value chain,
and that quantification is an essential part of telling the story of
aluminium in buildings and construction. It also shows that, at
present, LCA is a useful but imperfect science, and that there are
significant gaps in available data–such as geographically specific
recycling rates or average realized life expectancies of common
building components.
90 interim conclusion interim conclusion 91

APPENDIX
frame assembly materials

92 glossary glossary 93
Life Cycle Assessment of Window Framing:
Frame Assembly Material Quantities
The following pages show the complete bill of materials for a single window frame at the end of
product manufacturing for each of the basic window framing assemblies modeled (Weidema 2013). Window frame, wood, U=1.5 W/m2K (GLO) | at plant
Sawn timber, softwood, planed, kiln dried 0.211 m3
Window frame, aluminium, U=1.6 W/m K (GLO) | at plant 2 Sawn timber, hardwood, planed, kiln dried, u=10% 0.00171 m3
Aluminium, production mix 3.06 kg

Aluminium, production mix 39.7 kg
Aluminium, production mix, cast alloy 0.0156 kg
Synthetic rubber 4.87 kg
Steel, low-alloyed 5.18 kg
Primary Materials
Reinforcing steel 0.516 kg

Copper 0.00623 kg
Chromium steel 18/8 0.457 kg
Zinc, primary 0.29 kg
Polyethylene, HDPE, granulate 0.246 kg
Synthetic rubber 1.14 kg
Isopropanol 0.0208 kg
Polyvinylchloride 0.136 kg
Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymer, ABS 0.4 kg
Nylon 66, glass-filled 0.349 kg
Nylon 6 0.0146 kg
Primary Materials
Polyethylene, LDPE, granulate 0.0233 kg
Adhesive for metals 0.29 kg
Polypropylene, granulate 0.0233 kg
Anodising, aluminium sheet 9.8 m2
Propylene glycol, liquid 0.000238 kg
Initial Processes &
Section bar extrusion, aluminium 38 kg

1-butanol, propylene hydroformylation 0.0197 kg
Section bar rolling, steel 0.975 kg
Energy
Acetone, liquid 0.0173 kg

Glass fibre reinforced plastic, polyamide, injection 5.27 kg
Toluene, liquid 0.0311 kg
Extrusion, plastic film 0.246 kg
Isopropanol 0.000476 kg
Metal working factory 2.32E-08 p
Methyl ethyl ketone 0.000238 kg
Electricity, medium voltage, production UCTE, at grid 1.27 kWh
Water, completely softened 0.377 kg
Alkyd paint, white, 60% in H2O 5.49 kg
Benzimidazole-compounds 0.00396 kg
Alkyd resin, long oil, 70% in white spirit 0.0244 kg
Melamine formaldehyde resin 0.0733 kg
White spirit 0.007 kg
Titanium dioxide, production mix 0.000595 kg
Section bar extrusion, aluminium 3.06 kg
Initial Processes & Energy

Anodizing, aluminium sheet 0.81 m2
Zinc coating, pieces 0.493 m2
Wood pellets, u=10% -0.00444 m3
Pellets, mixed, burned in furnace 50kW 54 MJ
94 frame assembly materials frame assembly materials 95

Window frame, wood-metal, U=1.6 W/m2K (GLO) | at plant Window frame, poly vinyl chloride, U=1.6 W/m2K (GLO) | at plant
Sawn timber, softwood, planed, kiln dried 0.195 m3 Polyvinylchloride 58.4 kg
Sawn timber, hardwood, planed, kiln dried, u=10% 0.00171 m3 Polyethylene, LDPE, granulate 0.00578 kg
Aluminium, production mix 12.2 kg Polypropylene, granulate 0.219 kg
Aluminium, production mix, cast alloy 0.0156 kg Polystyrene, high impact, HIPS 0.208 kg
Primary Materials
Steel, low-alloyed 5.12 kg Polystyrene foam slab 0.184 kg
Zinc, primary 0.29 kg Chemicals organic 0.0287 kg
Copper 0.00623 kg Synthetic rubber 0.798 kg
Synthetic rubber 2.91 kg Aluminium, production mix 1.1 kg
1-butanol, propylene hydroformylation 0.042 kg Aluminium, production mix, cast alloy 0.0174 kg
Acetone, liquid 0.0136 kg Steel, low-alloyed 30 kg

Primary Materials
Toluene, liquid 0.0245 kg Copper 0.00698 kg
Isopropanol 0.000375 kg Zinc, primary 0.325 kg
Methyl ethyl ketone 0.000187 kg Extrusion, plastic pipes 54.3 kg

Water, completely softened 0.823 kg Injection molding, plastics 1.9 kg
Alkyd paint, white, 60% in H2O 5.06 kg Section bar extrusion, aluminium 1.1 kg
Nylon 66, glass-filled 1.09 kg Section bar rolling, steel 37.9 kg
Polyvinylchloride 0.136 kg Zinc coating, coils 2.11 m2
Polyethylene, LDPE, granulate 0.0233 kg Zinc coating, pieces 0.463 m2
Polypropylene, granulate 0.0233 kg Metal working factory 4.32E-08 p

Propylene glycol, liquid 0.000187 kg Electricity, medium voltage, production UCTE, at grid 13.8 kWh
Benzimidazole compounds 0.00864 kg
Alkyd resin, long oil, 70% in white spirit 0.0244 kg
Melamine formaldehyde resin 0.0733 kg
White spirit 0.00551 kg
Titanium dioxide, production mix 0.000468 kg
Anodizing, aluminium sheet 3.4 m2

Section bar extrusion, aluminium 12.2 kg
Zinc coating, pieces 0.488 m2
Pellets, mixed, burned in furnace 50kW 54 MJ
Wood pellets, u=10%, at storehouse -0.00444 m3
96 frame assembly materials frame assembly materials 97

glossary
Glossary
Acidification potential is an equivalency factor of acidifying Eutrophication potential is an equivalency factor of eutrophying
pollutants, defined by their common denominator, H+. Example pollutants, defined by their common denominator, N.
impacts caused by acidification include acid rain and acidic Eutrophication is associated with excessively high levels of nutrients
particulate pollution.1 that lead to shifts in species composition and increased biological
productivity, such as algal blooms.1
Allocation is the partitioning of the input or output flows of a unit
process to the product system under study.2 Functional unit is the quantified performance of a product system
for use as a reference unit in a Life Cycle Assessment study.2
Avoided Burden Method is another name for the End-of-Life
Recycling Method, defined below. Global warming potential [GWP] is an equivalency factor
of greenhouse gases that enhance radiative forcing in the
Cut-off factor is the specification of the amount of material or atmosphere, leading to climate change. The potential contribution
energy flow or the level of environmental significance associated of a substance to climate change is expressed as a ratio between
with unit processes or product system to be excluded from a study.2 the increased infrared absorption it causes and the increased
infrared absorption caused by 1 kg of CO2, and is measured in
Cut-off Method is another name for the Recycled Content Method, CO2 equivalents.1
defined below.
Grid mix is a description of the makeup and efficiency of
Embodied environmental impacts are the sum of all impacts electricity and heat transfer through a larger energy transmission
created in the production of materials, goods, or services, and system. In accordance with ISO 14044, in Life Cycle Assessment,
may include impacts from maintenance, or repair of the material when modelling electrical consumption, account shall be taken
or good. of the fuel mix and the efficiencies and losses associated with fuel
combustion, conversion, transmission and distribution. Average
EN15804 is the European standard for calculation methodology grid mixes account for the temporal and spatial variability of grid
and reporting of Environmental Product Declarations [EPDs] efficiencies across a region, country or industry.2
for construction products or services issued by the European
Committee for Standardization.3 Guarantee (or warranty) is a term of contract provided by a
manufacturer and a consumer that describes protections allotted
Energy mix is the combination of energy resources required to to the consumer upon purchase of a product. Such documents
produce a material, product or service; in the case of primary typically define a guarantee period or service life as a period
aluminium, the majority of energy requirement is in the form of time over which the repair or replacement of a product is
of electricity, which has been generated from a mix of primary expected to be supported by its manufacturer. See Service life for
energy sources (thermal, hydropower, etc.), but energy is also further description.
transferred through combustion of fuels (coal, gas, etc.). Energy
mixes combining power and fuel mixes are often regionally Impact category is a class representing environmental issues
defined, based on availability of energy resources. of concern to which life cycle inventory analysis results may be
assigned.2
End-of-Life Recycling Method is a methodology for treatment of
recycling in LCA that is based on a product life cycle and material ISO 14040/44 is the international standard for calculation
stewardship perspective. It considers the fate of products after methodology and reporting of Life Cycle Assessment issued by the
their use stage and the resultant material output flows. International Organization for Standardisation.2
Environmental Product Declaration [EPD] is a highly standardized Life Cycle Assessment [LCA] is a compilation and evaluation to
form of LCA result reporting primarily created by product quantify the inputs, outputs, and potential environmental impacts
manufacturers to provide environmental information about their of a product or service throughout its life cycle.2
products as a form of eco-labelling.

One-at-a-time [OAT] technique for sensitivity analysis is a method Notes
of systematic procedure for estimating the effects of the choices 1 Names and definitions of impact categories used in this report are
made regarding methods and data on the outcome of a study in based on TRACI2 characterization scheme, developed by the US
EPA. Documentation of impact categories and characterization
which one variable is changed at a time.2 equations can be found at: United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and
other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) User’s Manual. 2012. http://
Ozone depletion potential is an equivalency factor measuring www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/traci/traci.html Impact categories are also
the potential contribution of a substance to the thinning of the well explained in Kathrina Simonen, Life Cycle Assessment, New York:
Routledge, 2014.
stratospheric ozone layer and is measured relative to CFC-11.1 2 ISO 14040:2006, Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment -
Principles and Framework (ISO, 2006).
3 EN15804 - Sustainability of construction works - Environmental product
Photochemical smog formation potential is an equivalency factor declarations - Core rules for the product category of construction
measuring secondary pollutants formed in the lower atmosphere products.
known to cause photochemical smog, a cause of health problems

and damage to vegetation. Photochemical smog formation
potential is measured in O3 equivalents.1
Recycled Content Method (Recycled Content Approach) looks

back to where material feedstock was sourced, and provides
a measure of waste diversion. This approach is based on a
waste management perspective, where the general aim is to
promote a market for recycled materials that is otherwise limited,
uneconomic, or immature.
Recycling is the process of recovering valuable materials or

resources from products at the end of their useful life, from waste
streams or from production processes.
Reclamation is the process of setting aside material from the waste

stream for future reuse with minimal processing.
Resource depletion (fossil fuel) is a measure of the quantity of fossil

fuel resources consumed across fuel types (coal, oil or natural gas)
and is commonly reported in energy values (MJ) only, without
accounting for the relative scarcity or environmental impacts of
individual fuel types.1
Service life is a period of time for which a manufacturer can be

expected to be responsible for servicing or supporting the material
or product. Expected service lifetimes are often a conservative
estimate and are not required to represent either the maximal
record life of a product or its average useable life. See Guarantee
for further description.

bibliography
Bibliography
Abeysundara, U. G. Y., S. Babel, and S. Gheewala. ‘A matrix in life Bare, J. C. Developing a Consistent Decision-Making Framework
cycle perspective for selecting sustainable materials for buildings by Using the U.S. EPA’s TRACI. In American Institute of Chemical
in Sri Lanka.’ Building and Environment 44, no. 5 (2009): 997–1004. Engineers Symposium (2002). Accessed online 2/28/2015. http://
www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/traci/aiche2002paper.pdf
Abeysundra, U. G. Y., S. Babel, S. Gheewala, and A. Sharp.
‘Environmental, economic and social analysis of materials for Bayer, C., Gamble, M., Gentry, R., & Joshi, S. ‘AIA guide to
doors and windows in Sri Lanka.’ Building and Environment 42, no. building life cycle assessment in practice.’ The American Institute
5 (2007): 2141–2149. of Architects, Washington DC (2010). Accessed online 2/5/2015.
http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/
Al-Ghamdi, S.G., M.M. Bilec. ‘Life-Cycle Thinking and the LEED aiab082942.pdf
Rating System: Global Perspective on Building Energy Use and
Environmental Impacts.’ Environmental Science and Technology Bertram, M., Martchek, K.J., Rombach, G. ‘Material flow analysis in
49, no. 7 (2015): 4048–4056. the aluminum industry.’ Journal of Industrial Ecology 13 (5), (2009):
650–654.
Aktas Can B, Bilec, Melissa, M. ‘Impact of lifetime on US residential
building LCA results.’ International Journal of LCA Vol 17, Issue 3 Blengini, G. A. ‘Life cycle of buildings, demolition and recycling
(2012): 337–349 potential: A case study in Turin, Italy.’ Building and Environment 44,
no. 2 (2009): 319–330.
Altenpohl, D. Aluminum: Technology, Applications, and
Environment: a Profile of a Modern Metal: Aluminum from Within-- Blengini, G. A., and T. di Carlo. ‘The changing role of life cycle
the Sixth Edition. Edited by J. Gilbert Kaufman, and Subodh K. Das. phases, subsystems and materials in the LCA of low energy
Aluminum Association, 1998. buildings.’ Energy and Buildings 42, no. 6 (2010): 869–880.
Americas, P. E. ‘Life cycle impact assessment of aluminum Buyle, M., Braet, J., and A. Audenaert. ‘Life cycle assessment in
beverage cans.’ Prepared for Aluminum Association (2010). the construction sector: A review.’ Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews 26 (2013): 379–388.
Asif, M., A. Davidson, and T. Muneer. ‘Life cycle analysis of window
materials – a comparative assessment.’ CIBSE National Technical Citherlet, S., F. di Guglielmo, and J. Gay. ‘Window and advanced
Conference, London. June 18 2002. glazing systems life cycle assessment.’ Energy and Buildings 32, no.
3 (2000): 225–234.
Asif, M., T. Muneer, and R. Kelley. ‘Life cycle assessment: A case
study of a dwelling home in Scotland.’ Building and Environment Consultants, PRé. ‘SimaPro software.’ Website: http://www.pre-
42 (2007): 1391–1394. sustainability.com/simapro-lca-software (accessed January 2015)
(2008).
ASTM E2921-13, Standard Practice for Minimum Criteria for
Comparing Whole Building Life Cycle Assessments for Use with Crawford, Robert H. Life Cycle Assessment in the Built Environment.
Building Codes and Rating Systems, ASTM International, West London: Spon Press, 2011.
Conshohocken, PA, 2013, DOI: 10.1520/E2921 www.astm.org
da Silva, N., N. d’Souza, and M. Binder. Life Cycle Impact
Atherton, J. ‘Declaration by the metals industry on recycling Assessment of Aluminum Beverage Cans. (PE Americas, Boston,
principles.’ The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 12/1 MA, 2010) Accessed online 2/9/2015. http://www.aluminum.org/
(2007): 59–60. sites/default/files/FINAL_CAN_LCA_REPORT.pdf
106 bibliography bibliography 107

Das, Subodh K., and John AS Green. ‘Aluminum industry and EAA, ‘Life Cycle Assessment and Aluminium: ‘What You Need
climate change–Assessment and responses.’ JOM 62, no. 2 (2010): to Know”. (EAA, 2010) http://www.alufuture.org/affg/pdf/LCA_
27–31. What%20you%20need%20to%20know.pdf (accessed 1.03.10).
Das, Subodh K., W. Jerry Long III, H. Wayne Hayden, John AS Green, Ekvall, Tomas, and Göran Finnveden. ‘Allocation in ISO 14041–a
and Warren H. Hunt Jr. ‘Energy implications of the changing world critical review.’ Journal of Cleaner Production 9, no. 3 (2001): 197–
of aluminum metal supply.’ JOM 56, no. 8 (2004): 14–17. 208.
De Schrynmakers, P. ‘Life cycle thinking in the aluminium industry.’ EN15804 - Sustainability of construction works – Environmental
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 Supplement 1 product declarations – Core rules for the product category of
(2009): S2–S5. construction products.
Dimoudi, A. and C. Tompa. ‘Energy and environmental indicators Frischknecht, Rolf. ‘LCI modelling approaches applied on
related to construction of office buildings.’ Resources, Conservation recycling of materials in view of environmental sustainability, risk
and Recycling 53, no. 1–2 (2008): 86–95. perception and eco-efficiency.’ The International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment 15, no. 7 (2010): 666–671.
Doka, G. ‘Life Cycle Inventories of Waste Treatment Services.’
(Ecoinvent report no. 13, Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, Groen, Evelyne A., Reinout Heijungs, Eddie AM Bokkers, and
Dübendorf, 2007). Imke JM de Boer. ‘Sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment.’
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Life Cycle
Dubreuil, A., Young, S., Atherton, J., Gloria, T. ‘Metals recycling Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector, 8–10 October 2014 San
maps and allocation procedures in life cycle assessment.’ The Francisco, USA (2014): 482–488.
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 15 (6) (2010): 621–
634. Hammond, G. and Jones, C. (Lowrie, F. and Tse, P. (eds.)).
Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy [ICE]
EAA, Ecological Profile Report for the European Aluminium Industry. (Report) Bath: BSRIA/Bath University, 2011.
(European Aluminium Association, Brussels, 1996)
Huang, Yue, Alan Spray, and Tony Parry. ‘Sensitivity analysis of
EAA, Environmental Profile Report for the European Aluminium methodological choices in road pavement LCA.’ The International
Industry, reference year 2013 (EAA, 2008) http://www.alueurope. Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18, no. 1 (2013): 93–101.
eu/environmental-profile-report/
Huberman, N. and D. Pearlmutter. ‘A life-cycle energy analysis of
EAA, Aluminium Recycling in LCA. (European Aluminium building materials in the Negev desert.’ Energy and Buildings 40,
Association, Brussels, 2007). no. 5 (2008): 837–848.
EAA, Aluminium Recycling in LCA. (European Aluminium IAI, ‘Current IAI Statistics.’ IAI, London, UK (2015a). Accessed online
Association, Brussels, 2013). 5/18/2015. http://www.world-aluminium.org/statistics/
EAA, Environmental Profile Report for the European Aluminium IAI, ‘Primary Aluminium Smelting Power Consumption.’ IAI,
Industry: Life Cycle Inventory Data for Aluminium Production London, UK (2015b). Accessed online 5/18/2015. http://www.
and Transformation Processes in Europe. (European Aluminium world-aluminium.org/statistics/primary-aluminium-smelting-power-
Association, Brussels, 2008). consumption/

IAI, Global Mass Flow Model. IAI, London, UK (2014). Accessed ILCD Handbook - General guide on LCA, Institute for Environment
online 4/6/2015. http://www.world-aluminium.org/publications/ and sustainability, European Commission, JRC, 2010 ( http://lct.jrc.
tagged/mass%20flow%20model/ ec.europa.eu )
IAI, ‘Current IAI Statistics.’ IAI, London, UK (2014a). Accessed online International Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 2014:
3/23/2015. http://www.world-aluminium.org/statistics/ Mitigation of Climate Change. Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga,
Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum,
IAI, Regional Mass Flow Models: Europe. IAI, London, UK (2014b). S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer,
Accessed online 4/6/2015. http://www.world-aluminium.org/ C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (Ed.). ‘Contribution
publications/tagged/mass%20flow%20model/ of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Governmental Panel on Climate Change.’ Cambridge University
IAI, Regional Mass Flow Models: China. IAI, London, UK (2014c). Press, Cambridge (2014).
Accessed online 4/6/2015. http://www.world-aluminium.org/
publications/tagged/mass%20flow%20model/ ISO 14040:2006. Environmental Management–Life Cycle
Assessment–Principles and Framework (ISO, 2006).
IAI, Regional Mass Flow Models: South America. IAI, London, UK
(2014d). Accessed online 4/6/2015. http://www.world-aluminium. ISO 14044:2006. Environmental Management–Life Cycle
org/publications/tagged/mass%20flow%20model/ Assessment–Requirements and Guidelines (ISO, 2006).
IAI, Global Life Cycle Inventory Data for the Primary Aluminium ISO 21930:2006 Sustainability in building construction –
Industry. IAI, London, UK (2013a). Accessed online 3/23/2015. http:// Environmental declaration of building products (ISO, 2006).
www.world-aluminium.org/media/filer_public/2013/10/17/2010_
life_cycle_inventory_report.pdf Kim, K. ‘A comparative life cycle assessment of a transparent
composite façade system and a glass curtain wall system.’ Energy
IAI, ‘Global Aluminium Recycling: A Cornerstone of Sustainable and Buildings 43, no. 12 (2011): 3436–3445.
Development.’ IAI, London, UK (2009). Accessed online 4/7/2015.
http://www.world-aluminium.org/media/filer_public/2013/01/15/ Koch, Matthias, and Jochen Harnisch. ‘CO2 emissions related to
fl0000181.pdf the electricity consumption in the European primary aluminium
production a comparison of electricity supply approaches.’ The
IAI, Life Cycle Inventory of the Worldwide Aluminium Industry with International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 7, no. 5 (2002): 283–
Regard to Energy Consumption and Emissions of Greenhouse 289.
Gases. (International Aluminium Institute, London, 2000).
Klöpffer, W. ‘Allocation rule for open-loop recycling in life cycle
IAI, Life Cycle Assessment of Aluminium: Inventory Data for the assessment.’ The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 1
Worldwide Primary Aluminium Industry. (International Aluminium (1) (1996): 27–31.
Institute, London, 2003).
Klöpffer, W. ‘Experiences with the critical review process of
IAI, Life Cycle Assessment of Aluminium: Inventory Data for the aluminium LCI data.’ The International Journal of Life Cycle
Primary Aluminium Industry, Year 2010 Update. (International Assessment 14 (0) (2009): 45–51.
Aluminium Institute, London, 2013b). http://www.world-aluminium.
org/publications/ Lawson, W. R. ‘Life-cycle analysis of windows.’ Proceeding of
Windows Innovation (1995).
IEA, Energy Technology Transitions for Industry: Strategies for the
Next Industrial Revolution. (The International Energy Agency (IEA), Leroy, Christian. ‘Provision of LCI data in the European aluminium
Paris, France, 2009) industry: Methods and examples.’ International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment 14 (2009) Supplement: S10–S44.

Leroy, Christian, Thomas, J.S., Avery, N., Bollen, J., and L. Tikana. the Total Environment 408, no. 12 (2010): 2435–2443.
‘Tackling Recycling Aspects in EN15804.’ International Symposium
on Life Cycle Assessment and Construction, Ed. A. Ventura and C. PE International. Harmonization of LCA Methodologies for Metals.
de la Roche (2012). Available online at http://www.rilem.org/gene/ (PE International, Ottawa, 2014) Accessed online 3/23/2015.
main.php?base=500218&id_publication=415&id_papier=7985 https://www.icmm.com/document/6657
Liu, G. and D. Müller. ‘Addressing sustainability in the aluminium Preservation Green Lab. ‘The Greenest Building: Quantifying the
industry: a critical review of life cycle assessments.’ Journal of Environmental Value of Building Reuse.’ (Report, National Trust for
Cleaner Production 35 (2012): 108–117. Historic Preservation, 2012). Accessed online 12/3/2012.
Martchek, Kenneth. ‘Modeling More Sustainable Aluminium.’ Puga, Hélder, J. Barbosa, Delfim Soares, F. Silva, and S. Ribeiro.
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11(1) (2006):34–37. ‘Recycling of aluminium swarf by direct incorporation in aluminium
melts.’ Journal of Materials Processing Technology 209, no. 11
Mösle, P., R.O. Gama, T. Haun, J. Fauth, ‘Sustainability (2009): 5195–5203.
assessment of windows and curtain walls.’ (Report, European
Aluminium Association, 2015). Accessed online 1/30/15, http:// Pullen, J. ‘The Use of LCA by the International Aluminium Industry.’
www.dreso.com/uploads/tx_templavoila/Drees___Sommer_ Light Metal Age (2000): 80.
Fassadenstudie_2015.pdf.
Radhi, H. and S. Sharples. ‘Global warming implications of façade
Norgate, T. E., S. Jahanshahi, and W. J. Rankin. ‘Assessing the parameters: A life cycle assessment of residential buildings in
environmental impact of metal production processes.’ Journal of Bahrain.’ Environmental Impact Assessment Review 38 (2013):
Cleaner Production 15, no. 8 (2007): 838–848. 99–108.
Norgate, T.E. and Rankin, W.J. ‘Greenhouse gas emissions from Rombach, G. ‘Raw material supply by aluminium recycling–
aluminium production – a life cycle approach.’ Proceedings Efficiency evaluation and long-term availability.’ Acta Materialia
from the International Symposium on Greenhouse Gases in the 61, no. 3 (2013): 1012–1020.
Metallurgical Industries: Policies, Abatement, and Treatment.
Toronto, Canada (2001): 275–290. Rombach, G., R. Modaresi, and D.B. Müller. ‘Aluminium Recycling
– Raw Material Supply from a Volume and Quality Constraint
Ootani, M., Onoye, T., Miyazaki, M. ‘Life cycle inventory of System.’ World of Metallurgy – ERZMETALL 65, no 3 (2012): 157–162.
aluminium wrought products for various usage.’ Proceedings from
the 5th International Conference on Ecobalance, LCA Research RS Means. RS Means Customer Cost Estimator, 2012.
Committee, Japan Aluminium Association, Tsukuba, Japan (2002).
Ryberg, Morten, Marisa DM Vieira, Melissa Zgola, Jane Bare, and
Ortiz, O., J. C. Pasqualino, G. Díez, and F. Castells. ‘The environmental Ralph K. Rosenbaum. ‘Updated US and Canadian normalization
impact of the construction phase: An application to composite factors for TRACI 2.1.’ Clean Technologies and Environmental
walls from a life cycle perspective.’ Resources, Conservation and Policy 16, no. 2 (2014): 329–339.
Recycling 54, no. 11 (2010): 832–840.
Salazar J. and T. Sowlati. ‘A Review of life-cycle assessment of
Ortiz-Rodríguez, O., F. Castells, and G. Sonnemann. ‘Life cycle windows.’ Forest Products Journal 10, vol. 58 (2008):91–96.
assessment of two dwellings: One in Spain, a developed country,
and one in Colombia, a country under development.’ Science of

Schlesinger, Mark E. Aluminum recycling. London: CRC Press, 2013. VinylPlus. ‘2014 Progress Report.’ (Report, Vinyl Plus, 2014).
Accessed online 3/31/2014. http://www.vinylplus.eu/uploads/
Simonen, Kathrina. Life Cycle Assessment. (Pocket Architecture Modules/Bannersreport/vinylplus-pr2014_en.pdf
Technical Series) London: Routeledge, 2014.
Wallhagen, M., M. Glaumann, and T. Malmqvist. ‘Basic building life
Sinha, A. and A. Kutnar. ‘Carbon Footprint versus Performance cycle calculations to decrease contribution to climate change–
of Aluminum, Plastic, and Wood Window Frames from Cradle to Case study on an office building in Sweden.’ Building and
Gate.’ Buildings 2 (2012): 542–553. Environment 46, no. 10 (2011): 1863–1871.
Stacey, Michael, ed. Toward Sustainable Cities Report 1: Aluminium Wardenaar, Tjerk, Theo van Ruijven, Angelica Mendoza Beltran,
and Durability. Nottingham: Cwningen Press, 2014. Kathrine Vad, Jeroen Guinée, and Reinout Heijungs. ‘Differences
between LCA for analysis and LCA for policy: a case study on the
Stacey, Michael, ed. Aluminium Recyclability & Recycling: Towards consequences of allocation choices in bio-energy policies.’ The
Sustainable Cities. Nottingham: Cwningen Press, 2015. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17, no. 8 (2012):
1059–1067.
Taborianski, V. M. and R. T. A. Prado. ‘Methodology of CO2
emission evaluation in the life cycle of office building façades.’ Weidema, B.P.; Bauer, Ch.; Hischier, R.; Mutel, Ch.; Nemecek,
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 33, no. 1 (2012): 41–47. T.; Reinhard, J.; Vadenbo, C.O.; Wernet, G. The Ecoinvent
database: Overview and methodology, Data quality guideline
Tan, R. and Hsien H. Khoo. ‘An LCA study of a primary aluminum for the ecoinvent database version 3. (www.ecoinvent.org, 2013.
supply chain.’ Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (2005): 607–618. Accessed 2/9/2015).
Tharumarajah, A. ‘Benchmarking aluminium die casting Weir, G. and T. Muneer. ‘Energy and environmental impact analysis
operations.’ Resources, Conservation and Recycling 52, no. 10 of double-glazed windows.’ Energy Conservation Management
(2008): 1185–1189. 39, no. 3/4 (1998): 243–256.
Trenton, Elizabeth. ‘The Application of Two Models of Life Cycle Werner, F. Material and Market Characteristics of Aluminium. In:
Assessment (LCA) for Transition to the Low-Carbon Economy: a Ambiguities in Decision-oriented Life Cycle Inventories. (Rotterdam:
Case Study in the Aluminum Industry.’ (2012). Springer, 2005).
UNEP/SETAC. Towards a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment. Werner, F. and K. Richter. ‘Economic Allocation in LCA: A Case
Valdivia, S., Lie Ugaya, C.M., Sonnemann, G. Hildenbrand, J. [Eds.] Study about Aluminum Window Frames.’ International Journal of
(2011). Accessed online 3/24/2015. http://www.unep.org/pdf/ Life Cycle Assessment 5, no. 2 (2000): 79–83.
UNEP_LifecycleInit_Dec_FINAL.pdf
United States Geological Survey. Mineral Commodity Summaries

2015. (Virginia, published January 2015). Accessed online 2/8/15:
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/aluminum/
mcs-2015-alumi.pdf.
van Houwelingen, J., U. Boin, and M. Hryniuk. ‘A Collection of

Aluminium from Buildings in Europe: A Study by Delft University of
Technology.‘ (Report) European Aluminium Association, Brussels
(2004).

image credits
Image Credits
The author and publisher have made every effort to contact copyright holders and will be
happy to correct, in subsequent editions, any errors or omissions that are brought to their
attention.
Figure 3.2 KieranTimberlake 4.7 KieranTimberlake
1.1 Graph by KieranTimberlake, 2015; 3.3 KieranTimberlake 4.8 KieranTimberlake

based on similar diagram from the
3.4 KieranTimberlake 4.9 KieranTimberlake
report ‘Going on a Metal Diet’ by
Allwood et.al, 2011. Additional mass 3.5 Detail modified from original source: 4.10 KieranTimberlake
flow data from IAI, 2015 Wausau Window
4.11 Stephanie Carlisle
1.2 Photographs, top to bottom: Norsk 3.6 KieranTimberlake
5.1 IAI 2015
Hydro, Norsk Hydro, Zahariou Prime,
3.7 KieranTimberlake
ASA, Norsk Hydro 5.2 KieranTimberlake
3.8 Detail modified from original source:
2.1 Graph by Architecture 2030, 2013; 5.3 KieranTimberlake
Marvin
based on data from U.S. Energy
Information Administration, 2012 3.9 KieranTimberlake
2.2 Peter Aaron 3.10 KieranTimberlake
2.3 Michael Moran 3.11 Detail modified from original source:
Marvin 6.1 IAI 2009
2.4 Graph by KieranTimberlake, 2015;
based on IAI, 2015 3.12 KieranTimberlake 6.2 Luis Potes
2.5 KieranTimberlake, 2015 3.13 KieranTimberlake 6.3 Diagram by KieranTimberlake;

based on SimaPro network
2.6 Peter Aaron 3.14 Detail modified from original source:
diagram, PRé Consultants.
Milgard
2.7 Graph by KieranTimberlake, 2015;
6.4 IAI 2014a
based on Liu and Muller, 2012 3.15 EPA 2012
6.5 IAI 2014a
2.8 Stacey, 2015; based on data from 4.1 KieranTimberlake
IAI 2009 6.6 KieranTimberlake
2.9 IAI 2014 6.7 Sten Dueland
3.1 GSL Portes et fenetres (aluminium, 6.8 KieranTimberlake
wood), Sheerframe (aluminium-
6.9 Arnold Paul
clad wood), modified Sheerframe 4.5 KieranTimberlake
(PVCu)
118 image credits image credits 119

acknowledgements
Towards Sustainable Cities Research Team
Michael Stacey Architects Acknowledgements
The practice has a thoughtful approach to the design of Towards Sustainable Cities Research Team would like to
architecture. Michael Stacey Architects’ aim is to contribute to acknowledge the input to this research of:
people’s lives and the culture of contemporary society through an
informed knowledge of humanity, study of architectural • Chris Bayliss, Deputy Secretary General of International
precedents and urban habitats, combined with a detailed Aluminium Institute (IAI);
understanding of materials and fabrication processes. This • Marlen Bertram, Director - Product Stewardship of
knowledge base is underscored by a long-term commitment to International Aluminium Institute (IAI);
research. The benefit of using a component-based architecture • Bernard Gilmont, Director of Building & Transport Groups,
and off-site manufacturing is that it is possible to create high-quality
European Aluminium Association;
and cost-effective architecture delivered with the shortest possible
• Christian Leroy, Founder and Director of Metals
site time. This has been demonstrated on projects at a number of Sustainability Consulting;
scales including the Boat Pavilion, Regional Rail Stations, Cardiff • Michael Ramwell of Michael Stacey Architects;
Bridges and Ballingdon Bridge. The design approach of Michael • Michael Stacey of the Architecture and Tectonics Group
Stacey Architects is based on systems of components, yet each at the University of Nottingham and Michael Stacey
architectural project is client and site specific Architects;
• Carly Regn, Graphic Designer and Andrea Calabretta,
www.s4aa.co.uk Editor at KieranTimberlake.
KieranTimberlake
The practice brings together the experience and talents of nearly

100 professionals of diverse backgrounds and abilities in a practice
that is recognised worldwide. KieranTimberlake’s projects include
the programming, planning, and design of new structures as well
as the conservation, renovation, and transformation of existing
buildings, with special expertise in education, government, arts
and culture, civic, and residential projects. KieranTimberlake seeks
ways to improve the art, quality, and craft of architecture through
research into new materials, processes, assemblies, and products.
http://kierantimberlake.com
Architecture and Tectonics Group of The University of Nottingham
The Architecture and Tectonics Research Group addresses

the core of architecture including design as research and
research that supports and stimulates the design of high quality
contemporary architecture and infrastructure. Themes within this
research group include: architecture as a discipline, craft, digital
fabrication, form finding, offsite manufacture, façade systems,
tectonics, durability, emergent materials, zero carbon architecture
and human ecology.
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/research/groups/atrg/index.aspx PL: 17.7.15 1, 12.7.17 2.
122 acknowledgements acknowledgements 123

Towards Sustainable Cities: Publications
Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling

Aluminium and Durability

Michael Stacey
edited by Michael Stacey
Aluminium and Durability Aluminium Recyclability and Recycling
The durability of aluminium is probably one of Aluminium is almost infinitely recyclable and
the most important qualities of this metal when this is well understood. This research identifies
used to form architecture and infrastructure. that aluminium-based projects dating back
to 1950 that have been disassembled have
Charting one hundred years of the use of
all been recycled. 1950 is the first year of
aluminium in architecture and the built
entries in IAI’s global mass flow model. The
environment using 50 built works from 1895
research reviews the reasons why buildings are
to 1986, with four historic exemplars being
demolished and rates of material recovery at
inspected and presented in depth.
the end of use. Key examples of short life and
Twelve twentieth century award winning relocatable architecture are set out, alongside
and historically significant aluminium based the future role of Design for Disassembly [DfD].
buildings were inspected leading to the This research also identifies that there is a much
successful non-destructive testing of aluminium wider up take of cast aluminium components
finishes on three of these projects. in architecture than may have been expected.
Written and edited by Michael Stacey. Written by Michael Stacey.
The Towards Sustainable Cities Research Programme is funded by the International Aluminium Institute [IAI] and undertaken
by Michael Stacey Architects with KieranTimberlake and the Architecture and Tectonic Research Group [ATRG] of the
University of Nottingham. The research is structured around the primary benefits of aluminium, as articulated by the Future
Builds with Aluminium website (http://greenbuilding.world-aluminium.org), which is a sector specific component of the
Aluminium Story (http://thealuminiumstory.com). Towards Sustainable Cities is a three-year programme quantifying the in
use benefits of aluminium in architecture and the built environment.
124 publication series publication series 125

Loblolly House, Taylors Island, Maryland, USA,
architects KieranTimberlake,
photographer Peter Aaron
Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking, written by Stephanie Carlisle,
Efrie Friedlander, and Billie Faircloth of KieranTimberlake,
with further input from Michael Stacey and the Architecture
and Tectonics Research Group [ATRG] at the University of
Nottingham. This forms part of the Towards Sustainable Cities:
Quantifying the In-Use Benefits of Aluminium in Architecture
and the Built Environment Research Programme, funded by
the International Aluminium Institute [IAI] and undertaken by
Michael Stacey Architects with KieranTimberlake and ATRG.
The Towards Sustainable Cities Research Programme is

structured around the primary benefits of aluminium, as
articulated by the The Future Builds with Aluminium website
(http://greenbuilding.world-aluminium.org), which is a
sector-specific component of The Aluminium Story (http://
thealuminiumstory.com). Towards Sustainable Cities is a three-
yearprogramme quantifying the in-use benefits of aluminium in
architecture and the built environment.
A primary aim of this research is to quantify the in-use

carbon benefits arising from the specification of aluminium
in architecture and the built environment, to complement
the relatively well-understood emission savings from the use
of aluminium in transportation applications and through the
recycling of aluminium scrap. A vital goal of this research is to
quantify the potential contribution of aluminium towards the
creation of sustainable cities – a key task now that over half of
humanity lives in urban areas.
Life cycle thinking challenges architects, engineers,

and contractors to be mindful of the life history of any
manufactured product, and more specifically, to understand
chitects
the inputs (energy and water) and outputs (emissions to the
environment) that result from the transformation of matter
chitects
into product and from product to disposal. This report uses
Life Cycle Assessment, a modelling method, to quantify and
compare the environmental impacts and benefits associated
with aluminium building components to those associated with
alternative materials.
CwningenPress

Alu Life Cycle 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alu Life Cycle 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alu Life Cycle 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking

Towards Sustainable Cities

Aluminium and Life Cycle Thinking

International Aluminium Institute

Series Editor: Michael Stacey

Published by Cwningen Press, 2015

CwningenPress Michael Stacey Architects

Two Life Cycle Approach 14

Three Life Cycle Assessment of Window 26

Four Modelling Recyclability & Recycling 44

Five Modelling Durability 58

Six Modelling Manufacturing 72

Seven Interim Conclusion 88

92 Frame Assembly Materials

116 Image Credits

124 Publication Series

Hot-rolled strip Mechanical

Plate INDUSTRIAL Electrical

Global flow of aluminium

Fig 1.1 Global flow of aluminium (based on Allwood et.al, 201,

Towards Sustainable Cities - Quantifying the In Use Benefits of

Towards Sustainable Cities is structured as a series of studies on

life cycle approach

16 life cycle approach life cycle approach 17

While there can be value in establishing an approximate carbon

Integrating a broader view of the material life cycle to include use

Fig 2.3 Glass and aluminium

18 life cycle approach life cycle approach 19

Much of the available research on aluminium tends to focus on

20 life cycle approach life cycle approach 21

made? What are the impacts associated with those processes?’

22 life cycle approach life cycle approach 23

24 life cycle approach life cycle approach 25

life cycle assessment of window framing

Glass fiber Construction

MANUFACTURING & CONSTRUCTION

The study compares four window frame types: aluminium, wood,

16% Aluminium, cast alloy

Alkyd paint, 60% in H2O

Frame 67% 67%

frame frame Chemicals, organic

Resource MJ Depletion of non-renewable fossil fuels. The present model

modelling recyclability & recycling

46 modelling recyclability & recycling modelling recyclability & recycling 47

Scenario 1: Recycled Content Scenario 2: End of Life

48 modelling recyclability & recycling modelling recyclability & recycling 49

50 modelling recyclability & recycling modelling recyclability & recycling 51

20% PVCu Although most of the categories measured a reduction in

G l ob a l Wa rmi n g Pot e ntial Ac idif ic at io n

54 modelling recyclability & recycling modelling recyclability & recycling 55

Alternately, the End-of-Life Recycling Method promotes the

Fig 4.11 Demolition and material sorting. Philadelphia, PA, USA

56 modelling recyclability & recycling modelling recyclability & recycling 57

60 modelling durability modelling durability 61

62 modelling durability modelling durability 63

64 modelling durability modelling durability 65

While the end-of-life scenarios used in the model consider material

66 modelling durability modelling durability 67

68 modelling durability modelling durability 69