Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: STANDARD RING SETS (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location FI
Geographical representativeness description FI
Reference year 2025
Name
STANDARD RING SETS
Use advice for data set A1: This module considers the extraction and processing of raw materials and packaging materials. A2: This module covers the transportation of raw materials to the production site A3: This module includes the manufacture of the products. It has considered all the electricity consumption and waste generated in the production site. Typical end-of-life scenario for the product is that, after being used appropriately, it remains as part of the foundation or structure in the ground where it was utilized—for example, steel piles used in the foundation of an apartment building. However, a scenario was developed here where the product is excavated from the ground at the end of its life cycle and delivered for recycling to be used as secondary raw material. Data used in these modules represents the world. C1: This stage accounts for the processes involved in deconstructing or demolishing the product at the end of its life. It includes energy use, and any emissions associated with these activities. C2: This module considers the transportation of the demolished or deconstructed product components to waste processing or disposal sites. Emissions and fuel consumption from transportation are included here. Assumed transport distance was 50 kilometres. C3: This module covers the recycling of the product. It was assumed based on World Steel Association (2020), that 85 % of the product is recycled, and 15 % is landfilled. C4: This stage includes the final disposal of any product materials that cannot be reused or recycled. This module covers the steel landfilling as it was assumed that 15 % of the product is landfilled. D: This stage includes the benefits of recycling of the products. For Standard ring sets, it was assumed that 85 % of the steel is recycled and 15 % is landfilled based on World Steel Association (2020, pg 19). Life cycle inventory (LCI) study. Benefits from steel recycling have not been calculated for Green Line ring sets, as the steel used is already recycled material. Recycled steel cannot be used to account for additional benefits beyond the product's lifecycle due to the risk of double-counting benefits that were already accounted for in a previous system. Scenarios included are currently in use and are representative for one of the most probable alternatives. Typical end-of-life scenario for the product is that, after being used appropriately, it remains as part of the foundation or structure in the ground where it was utilized—for example, steel piles used in the foundation of an apartment building. However, a scenario was developed here where the product is excavated from the ground at the end of its life cycle and delivered for recycling to be used as secondary raw material. Data used in these modules represents the world. C1: This stage accounts for the processes involved in deconstructing or demolishing the product at the end of its life. It includes energy use, and any emissions associated with these activities. C2: This module considers the transportation of the demolished or deconstructed product components to waste processing or disposal sites. Emissions and fuel consumption from transportation are included here. Assumed transport distance was 50 kilometres. C3: This module covers the recycling of the product. It was assumed based on World Steel Association (2020), that 85 % of the product is recycled, and 15 % is landfilled. C4: This stage includes the final disposal of any product materials that cannot be reused or recycled. This module covers the steel landfilling as it was assumed that 15 % of the product is landfilled. D: This stage includes the benefits of recycling of the products. For Standard ring sets, it was assumed that 85 % of the steel is recycled and 15 % is landfilled based on World Steel Association (2020, pg 19). Life cycle inventory (LCI) study. Benefits from steel recycling have not been calculated for Green Line ring sets, as the steel used is already recycled material. Recycled steel cannot be used to account for additional benefits beyond the product's lifecycle due to the risk of double-counting benefits that were already accounted for in a previous system. Scenarios included are currently in use and are representative for one of the most probable alternatives.
Technical purpose of product or process Ring bit sets are a part of Casing advancement system (CAS) that provide a fast, reliable method for installing casings across all ground conditions. Designed for high productivity, precision and minimal environmental disruption, these systems are ideal for urban construction and sensitive environments. In drilling, ring bit sets act as the first contact point between the ground and casing, making way for the casing to advance. In this EPD, data on the Standard and Green Line ring sets is presented. The products do not differ in terms of purpose, characteristics, or production methods. The difference between the products is that recycled steel is used in the production of the Green Line ring set.
General comment on data set Allocation is required if some material, energy, and waste data cannot be measured separately for the product under investigation. In this study, allocation was applied only to packaging materials to estimate the amount of each packaging material (e.g., wooden pallet, collar, carton lid) allocated per product. The amount was determined based on the weight of the packaging material and the typical number of finished products that fit within one complete packaging unit. No other allocation was necessary. The raw material supplier guarantees the use of recycled steel in the tube products purchased from them. The raw materials used in Greenline products are always procured per order and production batch from the material supplier, ensuring that recycled steel is consistently used in Greenline products. Additionally, the raw materials for other products are predefined and ordered from specific suppliers, meaning the raw material used is always known for each production batch. As a result, the mass-balance approach is not applied. The study does not exclude any modules or processes which are stated mandatory in the reference standard and the applied PCR, except the module A4. The study does not exclude any hazardous materials or substances. The study includes all major raw material and energy consumption. All inputs and outputs of the unit processes, for which data is available for, are included in the calculation. There is no neglected unit process.
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
Biogenic carbon content
  • Carbon content (biogenic): 1.0 kg
  • Carbon content (biogenic) - packaging: 1.0 kg
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2030
Time representativeness description "2025-01-31" - "2030-01-31"
Technological representativeness

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Raw material supply
A1
 Transport
A2
 Manufacturing
A3
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Use of renewable primary energy (PERE)
Input
  • 45.6
  • 0.169
  • 1.32
  • 0.00299
  • 0.00107
  • 0.00441
  • 0.000222
  • 0.705
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PERM)
Input
  • 4.23
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of renewable primary energy resource (PERT)
Input
  • 49.9
  • 0.169
  • 1.32
  • 0.00299
  • 0.00107
  • 0.00441
  • 0.000222
  • 0.705
Use of non renewable primary energy (PENRE)
Input
  • 89.8
  • 7.63
  • 8.37
  • 0.472
  • 0.0781
  • 0.697
  • 0.023
  • 23.5
Use of non renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PENRM)
Input
  • 0.0000081
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of non renewable primary energy resource (PENRT)
Input
  • 89.8
  • 7.63
  • 8.37
  • 0.472
  • 0.0781
  • 0.697
  • 0.023
  • 23.5
Use of secondary material (SM)
Input
  • 1.88
  • 0.00371
  • 0.000487
  • 0.000196
  • 0.0000332
  • 0.00029
  • 0.00000578
  • -1.026
Use of renewable secondary fuels (RSF)
Input
  • 0.000179
  • 0.0000408
  • 0.0000254
  • 5.12E-7
  • 4.22E-7
  • 7.57E-7
  • 1.2E-7
  • 0.0000357
Use of non renewable secondary fuels (NRSF)
Input
  • 1.75E-7
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of net fresh water (FW)
Input
  • 0.0114
  • 0.00128
  • 0.0061
  • 0.0000312
  • 0.0000115
  • 0.0000461
  • 0.0000239
  • -0.0169
Hazardous waste disposed (HWD)
Output
  • 0.0637
  • 0.0125
  • 0.0101
  • 0.000525
  • 0.000132
  • 0.000776
  • 0.0000254
  • 0.661
Non hazardous waste dispose (NHWD)
Output
  • 21.2
  • 0.259
  • 0.376
  • 0.00715
  • 0.00245
  • 0.0106
  • 0.00058
  • 5.3
Radioactive waste disposed (RWD)
Output
  • 0.0000919
  • 0.00000337
  • 0.000113
  • 5.18E-8
  • 1.69E-8
  • 7.65E-8
  • 3.58E-9
  • 0.0000196
Components for re-use (CRU)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for recycling (MFR)
Output
  • 0.000175
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.85
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for energy recovery (MER)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Exported electrical energy (EEE)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Exported thermal energy (EET)
Output
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
 Transport
A2
 Manufacturing
A3
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 51.4
  • 7.63
  • 8.37
  • 0.472
  • 0.0781
  • 0.697
  • 0.023
  • 23.5
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.000212
  • 0.00000146
  • 0.00000177
  • 1.29E-8
  • 1.5E-8
  • 1.91E-8
  • 1.49E-9
  • -0.000177
Acidification potential, Accumulated Exceedance (AP)
  • 0.0456
  • 0.0014
  • 0.00177
  • 0.000325
  • 0.0000184
  • 0.000481
  • 0.00000664
  • -0.0154
Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP)
  • 7.2E-8
  • 1.04E-8
  • 1.49E-8
  • 5.52E-10
  • 8E-11
  • 8.16E-10
  • 2.7E-11
  • 7.88E-9
Eutrophication potential - freshwater (EP-freshwater)
  • 0.0105
  • 0.0000426
  • 0.0000516
  • 0.00000104
  • 4.19E-7
  • 0.00000154
  • 7.7E-8
  • -0.00467
Eutrophication potential - marine (EP-marine)
  • 0.00779
  • 0.000391
  • 0.000217
  • 0.000151
  • 0.00000603
  • 0.000223
  • 0.00000253
  • -0.00131
Eutrophication potential - terrestrial (EP-terrestrial)
  • 0.147
  • 0.00422
  • 0.00468
  • 0.00165
  • 0.0000656
  • 0.00244
  • 0.0000276
  • -0.0815
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • 2.93
  • 0.000128
  • 0.124
  • 0.00000368
  • 0.00000122
  • -0.00000544
  • -2.98E-7
  • 0.00114
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 0.8
  • 0.509
  • 0.163
  • 0.036
  • 0.00538
  • 0.0533
  • 0.000936
  • 2.31
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0.0104
  • 0.000226
  • 0.0000612
  • 0.00000369
  • 0.00000241
  • 0.00000546
  • 5.35E-7
  • -0.00156
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • 3.74
  • 0.51
  • 0.288
  • 0.0361
  • 0.00539
  • 0.0533
  • 0.000937
  • 2.3
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
No records found.
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
  • 0.0166
  • 0.00226
  • 0.000627
  • 0.000493
  • 0.000027
  • 0.000728
  • 0.0000099
  • 0.00362
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 0.479
  • 0.0448
  • 0.666
  • 0.00118
  • 0.000386
  • 0.00174
  • 0.0000663
  • 0.816

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
 Transport
A2
 Manufacturing
A3
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
1This impact category deals mainly with the eventual impact of low dose ionizing radiation on human health of the nuclear fuel cycle. It does not consider effects due to possible nuclear accidents, occupational exposure nor due to radioactive waste disposal in underground facilities. Potential ionizing radiation from the soil, from radon and from some construction materials is also not measured by this indicator.
2The results of this environmental impact indicator shall be used with care as the uncertainties on these results are high or as there is limited experiences with the indicator.
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • 49.1
  • 0.948
  • 3.14
  • 0.026
  • 0.011
  • 0.0384
  • 0.00193
  • -26.7
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 1.74E-9
  • 8.9E-11
  • 7.5E-11
  • 4E-12
  • 1E-12
  • 5E-12
  • 0
  • 4.17E-9
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 8.96E-8
  • 4.88E-9
  • 2.45E-9
  • 5.9E-11
  • 5.1E-11
  • 8.7E-11
  • 4E-12
  • 2.13E-8
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 0.0481
  • 0.0134
  • 0.255
  • 0.000209
  • 0.000068
  • 0.000309
  • 0.0000144
  • 0.0773
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 13.1
  • 7.51
  • 1.45
  • 0.033
  • 0.0787
  • 0.0488
  • 0.0452
  • -4.43
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 2.42E-7
  • 4.92E-8
  • 1.16E-8
  • 9.25E-9
  • 5.39E-10
  • 1.37E-8
  • 1.51E-10
  • 3.15E-8