Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: Crushed Stone Aggregates (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location LT
Geographical representativeness description FI
Reference year 2025
Name
Crushed Stone Aggregates
Use advice for data set The scope of the EPD is cradle to gate with modules C1-C4 and module D. The covered life-cycle modules listed in the following table. Geographical scope is Europe.
Technical purpose of product or process The products consist of natural sand and gravel mixtures, washed aggregates, and crushed aggregates. The materials are extracted from post-glacial deposits and further processed through screening, washing, and crushing, depending on the product group. Products are classified into three groups according to their applications and manufacturing processes 3 GROUP – Crushed Stone Aggregates Crushed and washed stone aggregates produced from solid rock. Road and foundation layers, drainage systems, concrete mixtures, and decorative surfacing. Manufacturing steps Excavation, screening, washing and crushing
General comment on data set The EPD covers products extracted and processed at the Pagiriai Gravel Quarry in Vilnius (Lithuania), which provided data for the period January - December 2024. The data collection has been done internally and thoroughly. The data is based on yearly production amounts and extrapolations of measurements on specific machines and plants. The EPD covers raw material supply, product production and end-of-life in Europe geographical scale. Aggregate production involves excavating, washing (group 1-2), and crushing (group 3) the sand and gravel. The site is powered by residual mix energy, additionally diesel for mobile machinery use. Background data was sourced from the ecoinvent 3.11, and One Click LCA databases. No poor or very poor data was found during the assessment of relevant data using PEF method (EN 15804:2012+A2:2019, Annex E, only E.2). The data quality assessment is done in accordance with EN 15941:2024 and is assessed in terms of precision, completeness, representativeness, consistency, and sources of data. Overall, the data quality can be described as good. The EN 15804 reference package used is based on EF 3.1. 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 3.11 datasets used in this study follow the Ecoinvent system model ‘Allocation, cut-off, 15804:2012+A2:2019. The methodological choices for allocation for reuse, recycling and recovery have been set according to the polluter pays principle (PPP). Scenarios included in the LCA are based on realistic scenarios which are currently in use and are representative for one of the most likely scenario alternatives. The environmental impacts of capital goods (e.g., production equipment, recycling machinery) and infrastructure (e.g., recycling facilities, transportation systems) have not been included in this assessment. The study does not exclude any modules or processes that are mandatory according to the Standards and PCR. No hazardous materials or substances are excluded. All major raw materials and energy inputs, as well as emissions and outputs from the unit processes for which data is available, are fully included in the calculation. In line with the PCR, the total excluded input and output flows do not exceed 5% of energy use or mass across the life cycle.
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
Biogenic carbon content
  • Carbon content (biogenic): 0.0 kg
  • Carbon content (biogenic) - packaging: 0.0 kg
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2030
Time representativeness description "2025-12-04" - "2030-12-04"
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
  • 2.02
  • 0.0326
  • 1.71
  • 4.51
  • 0.143
  • -9.9
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
  • 2.02
  • 0.0326
  • 1.71
  • 4.51
  • 0.143
  • -9.9
Use of non renewable primary energy (PENRE)
Input
  • 69.5
  • 5.19
  • 125
  • 16.7
  • 15.3
  • -102
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
  • 69.5
  • 5.19
  • 125
  • 16.7
  • 15.3
  • -102
Use of secondary material (SM)
Input
  • 0.0255
  • 0.00215
  • 0.0532
  • 0.00268
  • 0.00381
  • 8.1E+2
Use of renewable secondary fuels (RSF)
Input
  • 0.0000724
  • 0.00000563
  • 0.000676
  • 0.0000231
  • 0.0000796
  • -0.000752
Use of non renewable secondary fuels (NRSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of net fresh water (FW)
Input
  • 0.065
  • 0.000332
  • 0.0185
  • 0.0109
  • 0.0158
  • -0.292
Hazardous waste disposed (HWD)
Output
  • 0.223
  • 0.00582
  • 0.212
  • 0.0405
  • 0.0174
  • -0.772
Non hazardous waste dispose (NHWD)
Output
  • 5.56
  • 0.0848
  • 3.92
  • 3.41
  • 1E+2
  • -14.4
Radioactive waste disposed (RWD)
Output
  • 0.0000822
  • 5.42E-7
  • 0.0000266
  • 0.00012
  • 0.00000224
  • -0.000197
Components for re-use (CRU)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 9E+2
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for recycling (MFR)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 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
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

IndicatorUnit Production
A1-A3
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 69.5
  • 5.19
  • 125
  • 16.7
  • 15.3
  • -102
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.00002
  • 1.43E-7
  • 0.000024
  • 0.00000983
  • 9.32E-7
  • -0.0000439
Acidification potential, Accumulated Exceedance (AP)
  • 0.0275
  • 0.00356
  • 0.0294
  • 0.00417
  • 0.00438
  • -0.0505
Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP)
  • 8.9E-8
  • 5.92E-9
  • 1.27E-7
  • 1.34E-8
  • 1.74E-8
  • -6.65E-8
Eutrophication potential - freshwater (EP-freshwater)
  • 0.00108
  • 0.0000128
  • 0.00067
  • 0.000695
  • 0.0000548
  • -0.00264
Eutrophication potential - marine (EP-marine)
  • 0.0105
  • 0.00166
  • 0.00965
  • 0.000664
  • 0.00168
  • -0.0119
Eutrophication potential - terrestrial (EP-terrestrial)
  • 0.113
  • 0.0182
  • 0.105
  • 0.00588
  • 0.0184
  • -0.144
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • 0.00025
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 4.97
  • 0.399
  • 8.61
  • 0.724
  • 0.626
  • -8.31
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0.000676
  • 0.0000408
  • 0.00385
  • 0.00214
  • 0.000358
  • -0.00792
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • 4.97
  • 0.399
  • 8.61
  • 0.726
  • 0.626
  • -8.31
  • 4.97
  • 0.399
  • 8.61
  • 0.726
  • 0.626
  • -8.31
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
  • 0.035
  • 0.00543
  • 0.0433
  • 0.00188
  • 0.00663
  • -0.0398
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 0.411
  • 0.0134
  • 0.617
  • 0.467
  • 0.673
  • -12.3

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
  • 85.1
  • 2.96
  • 17.7
  • 23.1
  • 10.2
  • -23.7
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 7.38E-10
  • 4.1E-11
  • 1.42E-9
  • 2.16E-10
  • 1.13E-10
  • -2.24E-9
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 2.78E-8
  • 6.38E-10
  • 8.09E-8
  • 1.18E-8
  • 2.55E-9
  • -6.67E-8
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 0.33
  • 0.00221
  • 0.109
  • 0.467
  • 0.00917
  • -0.808
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 6.66
  • 0.343
  • 126
  • 3.26
  • 30.1
  • -91.9
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 5.65E-7
  • 1.02E-7
  • 8.62E-7
  • 1.48E-8
  • 1.01E-7
  • -7.57E-7