LCA of Fibre Flax Thermal Insulation

Struhala, Karel; Stránská, Zuzana; Sedlák, J.

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.824.761

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, less established feedstocks, such as flax (Kymäläinen, 2004; Kymäläinen & Sjöberg, 2008; Zach et al, 2013) and miscanthus (Hesch, 2000; Murphy et al, 1995; Nichtitz et al, 2016; Pude, 2005), also display favorable properties. The utilization of miscanthus as an insulation material has shown a very promising environmental performance (Wagner et al, 2017), whereas that of flax insulation has been more varied (Schmidt et al, 2004; Struhala et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative life cycle assessment of bio‐based insulation materials: Environmental and economic performances

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insulation materials decrease the final energy consumption of buildings. In Germany, fossil and mineral insulations dominate the market despite numerous life cycle assessments (LCAs) showing that bio‐based insulations can offer environmental benefits. Evaluating the results of such LCAs is, however, complex due to a lack of comparability or costs considered. The objective of this study is comparing bio‐based insulations under equal conditions to identify the most environmentally friendly and cost‐efficient material. For this purpose, a comparative LCA and life cycle costing (LCC) were conducted from “cradle to grave” for four bio‐based and two nonrenewable insulations. The bio‐based insulation materials evaluated were wood fiber, hemp fiber, flax, and miscanthus. The nonrenewable insulations were expanded polystyrene (EPS) and stone wool. Key data for the LCA of the bio‐based insulations were obtained from preceding thermal conductivity measurements under ceteris paribus conditions. Eighteen environmental impact categories were assessed, and direct costs were cumulated along the life cycle. Results show that the most environmentally friendly bio‐based insulation materials were wood fiber and miscanthus. A hotspot analysis found that, for agriculturally sourced insulations, cultivation had the largest environmental impact, and for wood fiber insulation, it was manufacturing. The use phase (including installation) constituted a cost hotspot. The environmental impacts of end‐of‐life incineration were strongly influenced by the fossil components of the materials. Overall, bio‐based insulations were more environmentally friendly than EPS and stone wool in 11 impact categories. The LCC found EPS and miscanthus insulation to be most cost‐efficient, yet market integration of the latter is still limited. It can be concluded that miscanthus biomass is an environmentally and economically promising bio‐based insulation material. Comparability of the environmental performance of the bio‐based insulations was increased by applying the same system boundary and functional unit, the same impact assessment methodology, and the preceding ceteris paribus thermal conductivity measurements.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative life cycle assessment of bio‐based insulation materials: Environmental and economic performances

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of thermal insulation materials: A critical review

Füchsl

Rheude²,

Röder³

2022

Cleaner Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regression Models for Predicting the Global Warming Potential of Thermal Insulation Materials

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impacts and benefits of thermal insulations on saving operational energy have been widely investigated and well-documented. Recently, many studies have shifted their focus to comparing the environmental impacts and CO2 emission-related policies of these materials, which are mostly the Embodied Energy (EE) and Global Warming Potential (GWP). In this paper, machine learning techniques were used to analyse the untapped aspect of these environmental impacts. A collection of over 120 datasets from reliable open-source databases including Okobaudat and Ecoinvent, as well as from the scientific literature containing data from the Environmental Product Declarations (EPD), was compiled and analysed. Comparisons of Multiple Linear Regression (MLR), Support Vector Regression (SVR), Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression, and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) regression methods were completed for the prediction task. The experimental results revealed that MLR, SVR, and LASSO methods outperformed the XGBoost method according to both the K-Fold and Monte-Carlo cross-validation techniques. MLR, SVR, and LASSO achieved 0.85/0.73, 0.82/0.72, and 0.85/0.71 scores according to the R2 measure for the Monte-Carlo/K-Fold cross-validations, respectively, and the XGBoost overfitted the training set, showing it to be less reliable for this task. Overall, the results of this task will contribute to the selection of effective yet low-energy-intensive thermal insulation, thus mitigating environmental impacts.

show abstract

LCA of Fibre Flax Thermal Insulation

Cited by 3 publications

References 5 publications

Comparative life cycle assessment of bio‐based insulation materials: Environmental and economic performances

Comparative life cycle assessment of bio‐based insulation materials: Environmental and economic performances

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of thermal insulation materials: A critical review

Regression Models for Predicting the Global Warming Potential of Thermal Insulation Materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About