Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: Hollow - Core slabs (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location LT
Geographical representativeness description FI
Reference year 2025
Name
Hollow - Core slabs
Use advice for data set SYSTEM BOUNDARY The scope of EPD is cradle to gate, modules C1–C4 and module D and covers impacts of raw materials’ production, their transportation to the production plant, manufacturing process, and end-of-life stage, also considering benefits beyond system boundaries.
Technical purpose of product or process Product 2 – Hollow-Core Slabs: These slabs have a wide range of applications, including floor structures between levels, roofing, parking decks, and other loadbearing components. The prestressed, hollow-core concrete slabs are produced using continuous casting technology based on the customer’s drawings or specifications. Slabs are custom-made according to the required height and length, depending on the loadbearing requirements. The standard width is 1200 mm, but slabs can be longitudinally cut into narrower sections. Ends of the slabs may also be cut at specific angles. Openings can be formed within the slabs based on customer drawings, provided their number and dimensions are structurally feasible. The standard fire resistance of these slabs is 60 minutes. Depending on the project and client needs, fire resistance can be increased to 90 or 120 minutes by modifying the slab cross-section and protective concrete layer thickness.
General comment on data set The quality requirements for the life cycle assessment were set according to the EN ISO 14044 standard (4.2.3.6) and EN 15804 standard (6.3.7). This LCA study follows the standard EN 15804:2012+A2:2019 and RTS PCR and no decisions are made based on the values. The study does not consider long-term emissions (i.e. over 100 years). Impact assessment characterization factors are aligned with EF 3.1. The calculations were conducted using One Click LCA -tool which is a cloud-based LCA software in compliancy with EN 15804 -standard. Allocation is required if some material, energy, and waste data cannot be measured separately for the product under investigation. In this study, as per EN 15804, allocation is conducted in the following order: 1. Allocation should be avoided. 2. Allocation should be based on physical properties (e.g. mass, volume) when the difference in revenue is small. 3. Allocation should be based on economic values. The allocations in the Ecoinvent 3.10.1.1 datasets used in this study follow the Ecoinvent system model ‘Allocation, cut-off, EN15804’. During calculations these allocations were made: Module A3 • Electricity, fuel consumptions reason for allocation: only measured on factory level. • Waste and wastewater from production, reason for allocation: only measured on factory level. Energy and waste have been allocated based on production volume. The study does not exclude any modules or processes which are stated mandatory in the EN 15804:2012+A2:2019 and the applied PCR. 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 more than 1% of total mass or energy flows. The module specific total neglected input and output flows also do not exceed 5% of energy usage or mass. Materials not considered in this study: oil used for moulds preparation and the Euro pallets used multiple times for outside storage of Product 1 (the amount used is less than 0,01% per DU for both materials)
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
Biogenic carbon content
  • Carbon content (biogenic): 0.0 kg
  • Carbon content (biogenic) - packaging: 0.0388 kg
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2030
Time representativeness description "2025-08-18" - "2030-08-18"
Technological representativeness

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Production
A1-A3
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Use of renewable primary energy (PERE)
Input
  • 231
  • 0.712
  • 2.55
  • 2.54
  • 1.05
  • -33.1
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PERM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of renewable primary energy resource (PERT)
Input
  • 231
  • 0.712
  • 2.55
  • 2.54
  • 1.05
  • -33.1
Use of non renewable primary energy (PENRE)
Input
  • 3.51E+3
  • 112
  • 186
  • 104
  • 108
  • -417
Use of non renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PENRM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of non renewable primary energy resource (PENRT)
Input
  • 3.51E+3
  • 112
  • 186
  • 104
  • 108
  • -417
Use of secondary material (SM)
Input
  • 28.1
  • 0.0467
  • 0.0793
  • 0.0518
  • 0.0273
  • 1.66E+3
Use of renewable secondary fuels (RSF)
Input
  • 0.00785
  • 0.000122
  • 0.00101
  • 0.000694
  • 0.000564
  • -0.00351
Use of non renewable secondary fuels (NRSF)
Input
  • 34.6
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of net fresh water (FW)
Input
  • 1.13
  • 0.00743
  • 0.0275
  • 0.0118
  • 0.113
  • -0.638
Hazardous waste disposed (HWD)
Output
  • 38.3
  • 0.125
  • 0.315
  • 0.173
  • 0.12
  • -9.53
Non hazardous waste dispose (NHWD)
Output
  • 482
  • 1.71
  • 5.84
  • 3.89
  • 708
  • -89.6
Radioactive waste disposed (RWD)
Output
  • 0.00293
  • 0.0000122
  • 0.0000397
  • 0.0000329
  • 0.0000166
  • -0.0000985
Components for re-use (CRU)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for recycling (MFR)
Output
  • 52.6
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1.68E+3
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for energy recovery (MER)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Exported electrical energy (EEE)
Output
  • 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.

IndicatorUnit Production
A1-A3
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 3.57E+3
  • 112
  • 186
  • 104
  • 108
  • -417
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.00222
  • 0.00000308
  • 0.0000358
  • 0.0000578
  • 0.00000702
  • -0.000322
Acidification potential, Accumulated Exceedance (AP)
  • 0.715
  • 0.0776
  • 0.0437
  • 0.0741
  • 0.0313
  • -0.196
Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP)
  • 0.00000533
  • 1.32E-7
  • 1.89E-7
  • 1.2E-7
  • 1.28E-7
  • -2.08E-7
Eutrophication potential - freshwater (EP-freshwater)
  • 0.0239
  • 0.000248
  • 0.000999
  • 0.000709
  • 0.000363
  • -0.0154
Eutrophication potential - marine (EP-marine)
  • 0.704
  • 0.036
  • 0.0144
  • 0.0321
  • 0.0119
  • -0.045
Eutrophication potential - terrestrial (EP-terrestrial)
  • 1.93
  • 0.394
  • 0.156
  • 0.353
  • 0.13
  • -0.521
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 472
  • 8.59
  • 12.8
  • 7.96
  • 4.42
  • -40.6
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0.0937
  • 0.00088
  • 0.00574
  • 0.0017
  • 0.00252
  • -0.0177
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • 473
  • 8.59
  • 12.8
  • 7.97
  • 4.42
  • -40.6
  • 473
  • 8.59
  • 12.8
  • 7.97
  • 4.42
  • -40.6
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
  • 0.727
  • 0.117
  • 0.0645
  • 0.105
  • 0.0467
  • -0.159
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 1.75E+4
  • 0.281
  • 0.92
  • 0.423
  • 0.313
  • -28.7

IndicatorUnit Production
A1-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
  • 7.43E+3
  • 6.19
  • 26.3
  • 11.3
  • 9.09
  • -106
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 2.96E-7
  • 8.84E-10
  • 2.12E-9
  • 1.43E-9
  • 8.14E-10
  • -8.26E-9
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 0.00000559
  • 1.4E-8
  • 1.21E-7
  • 5.89E-8
  • 1.87E-8
  • -3.19E-7
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 18
  • 0.0498
  • 0.162
  • 0.13
  • 0.0681
  • -0.48
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 2.46E+3
  • 7.88
  • 188
  • 26.9
  • 213
  • -255
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 0.0203
  • 0.0000022
  • 0.00000128
  • 0.0000142
  • 7.13E-7
  • -0.00000312