Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: Railway sleepers made of pine, u 20%, treated with copper solution and RVP Repellent (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location SE
Geographical representativeness description Main markets are Sweden and Northern Europe.
Reference year 2024
Name
Railway sleepers made of pine, u 20%, treated with copper solution and RVP Repellent
Use advice for data set Flow chart over production (A3 in orange) of the declared product and all other modules is shown below. Module A4 to D is further explained in the scenario section.
Technical purpose of product or process Railway sleepers are used for infrastructure purposes in public and private railway networks. A moisture content of 20% is used for the calculation. On request, timber with a different moisture content can be delivered. The sleepers are treated with Tanalith E 3463/3475, a waterbased copper solution, with a following oil-treatment with RVP Repellent. The poles are treated according to class NTR A. The sapwood content of the product is 32%. Railway sleepers are produced in different sizes and the declared product is representative for the average sawn timber produced by the sawmill. 100% pine
Classification
Class name : Hierarchy level
  • EPDNorge: Construction / Solid wood products
General comment on data set For forestry, national representative figures are used. Specific figures are used for transport from forestry to sawmill. Generic upstream data for energy wares, packaging and ancillary materials are mainly from Gabi (age 2017-2022). Data for the wood preservative is based on data from the preservative manufacturer. Data concerning A3 is based on specific data from the manufacturer. The reference year for data collection is 2022. The allocation is made in accordance with the provisions of EN15804. All impacts from the sub-processes are allocated to the main product. The shavings are sold and only attributed to its upstream impact from its previously processes. The sawmill and its multiple co-products are allocated based on their different economic values. The economic value of the different parts of the input round timber is attributed using the market value of its final products/co-products. A conservative approach is used for transport of round timber to the sawmill based on economic allocation factors (module A2). A conservative economic allocation approach is used for forestry products, where no impact is allocated to the tops and branches (GROT), except forestry operations aimed for GROT (forwarding and shipping). Indicator result on potential soil quality (SQP) is assessed based on national characterisation factors for Swedish forestry (Horn et al 2021). All major raw materials and all the essential energy used are included. All production processes are included. The limited cut-off that occur (<<1%) are related to packaging materials that are not substituted in module D. This cut-off rule does not apply for hazardous materials and substances. Inherent biogenic carbon and stored energy in packaging materials are balanced out directly.
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 2029
Time representativeness description 2024-02-08 - 2029-02-08
Technological representativeness
Technology description including background system Railway sleepers are delivered according to qualities, sizes and treatment specified by demands from different markets and customers. The raw dry mass is 420 kg/m3 for pine as a Swedish average and used here to calculate biogenic carbon content and the delivery density including water according to the current moisture content.The railway sleepers conform to the NTR standard, and specific requirements from customers.

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Production
A1-A3
Transport
A4
Installation
A5
De-construction
C1
Transport
C2
Waste processing
C3
Disposal
C4
Recycling Potential
D
Input
  • 479
  • 58.7
  • 0.476
  • 0.703
  • 9.87
  • 3.92
  • 0
  • 7.31E+3
Input
  • 8.46E+3
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -8.46E+3
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 8.94E+3
  • 58.7
  • 0.476
  • 0.703
  • 9.87
  • -8.46E+3
  • 0
  • 7.31E+3
Input
  • 2.68E+3
  • 171
  • 1.18
  • 2.05
  • 28.8
  • 11.4
  • 0
  • -1.05E+3
Input
  • 458
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -458
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 3.14E+3
  • 171
  • 1.18
  • 2.05
  • 28.8
  • -446
  • 0
  • -1.05E+3
Input
  • 1.15
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -5.58E+3
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -1.51E+3
Input
  • 22.9
  • 4.69
  • 0.0291
  • 0.0562
  • 0.789
  • 0.313
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0.00521
  • 7.21E-10
  • 3.9E-11
  • 9E-12
  • 1.21E-10
  • 4.8E-11
  • 0
  • -3.72E-8
Output
  • 2.28
  • 0.0216
  • 0.000172
  • 0.000258
  • 0.00363
  • 0.00144
  • 0
  • -0.753
Output
  • 0.0797
  • 0.000186
  • 0.0000493
  • 0.00000222
  • 0.0000312
  • 0.0000124
  • 0
  • -0.253
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 1.14
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 2.69
  • 0
  • 0.525
  • 0
  • 0
  • 542
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0.027
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

IndicatorUnit Production
A1-A3
Transport
A4
Installation
A5
De-construction
C1
Transport
C2
Waste processing
C3
Disposal
C4
Recycling Potential
D
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 2.67E+3
  • 171
  • 1.18
  • 2.05
  • 28.7
  • 11.4
  • 0
  • -1.99E+3
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.00022
  • 0.00000605
  • 3.83E-8
  • 7.24E-8
  • 0.00000102
  • 4.03E-7
  • 0
  • -0.0000136
Acidification potential, Accumulated Exceedance (AP)
  • 0.748
  • 0.126
  • 0.000782
  • 0.00151
  • 0.0212
  • 0.00843
  • 0
  • -0.431
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • -803
  • 0.0349
  • 0.000222
  • 0.000418
  • 0.00587
  • 793
  • 0
  • 822
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 1.1E+2
  • 11.2
  • 0.0704
  • 0.134
  • 1.89
  • 0.749
  • 0
  • -191
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • -693
  • 11.3
  • 0.0711
  • 0.136
  • 1.9
  • 794
  • 0
  • 632
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0.835
  • 0.0627
  • 0.00039
  • 0.000751
  • 0.0105
  • 0.00418
  • 0
  • -0.00373
  • 1.1E+2
  • 11.27
  • 0.07088
  • 0.1356
  • 1.894
  • 1
  • 0
  • -1.9E+2
Eutrophication potential - freshwater (EP-freshwater)
  • 0.0037
  • 0.00058
  • 0.0000036
  • 0.00000695
  • 0.0000976
  • 0.0000387
  • 0
  • -0.000416
Eutrophication potential - marine (EP-marine)
  • 0.367
  • 0.0681
  • 0.000421
  • 0.000815
  • 0.0114
  • 0.00454
  • 0
  • -0.00704
Eutrophication potential - terrestrial (EP-terrestrial)
  • 3.3
  • 0.647
  • 0.00399
  • 0.00774
  • 0.109
  • 0.0431
  • 0
  • 0.074
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
  • 0.575
  • 0.0883
  • 0.000547
  • 0.00106
  • 0.0148
  • 0.00589
  • 0
  • -0.0468
Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP)
  • 0.0000133
  • 2.53E-7
  • 1.56E-9
  • 3.03E-9
  • 4.26E-8
  • 1.69E-8
  • 0
  • -0.00000136
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 973
  • 201
  • 1.24
  • 2.41
  • 33.8
  • 13.4
  • 0
  • -3.95E+3

IndicatorUnit Production
A1-A3
Transport
A4
Installation
A5
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 Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 10.8
  • 0.385
  • 0.00795
  • 0.00461
  • 0.0647
  • 0.0257
  • 0
  • -31.7
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 0.00000448
  • 6.78E-7
  • 4.21E-9
  • 8.12E-9
  • 1.14E-7
  • 4.52E-8
  • 0
  • 0.019
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 5.92E+4
  • 219
  • 1.43
  • 2.62
  • 36.8
  • 14.6
  • 0
  • -403
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 0.00000265
  • 3.65E-7
  • 2.3E-9
  • 4.37E-9
  • 6.13E-8
  • 2.43E-8
  • 0
  • -0.00000253
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 6.47E-8
  • 5.98E-9
  • 3.9E-11
  • 7.2E-11
  • 1E-9
  • 3.99E-10
  • 0
  • -1.39E-8
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • 3.77E+3
  • 299
  • 1.91
  • 3.58
  • 50.3
  • 19.9
  • 0
  • -698