Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: Solid finger jointed scantlings, 100% pine, u12 (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location SE
Geographical representativeness description Sweden
Reference year 2025
Name
Solid finger jointed scantlings, 100% pine, u12
Use advice for data set Flow chart over production (A3) 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 Solid finger jointed scantlings with PVAC glulam and an average moisture content of 12%. Scantlings for further processing to components as frame, sash, post and other details for windows/doors are manufactured in dialog with customers and their specifications regarding dimensions, length, quality, structure, and packing. Product specification: Parameter Solid finger jointed scantlings Width (mm) max 150 Height (mm) max 80 Length (mm) max 6050, min 440 Density (kg/m3) 520 Annual rings (mm) max 4 Heartwood If required Moisture ratio (%) 12
Classification
Class name : Hierarchy level
  • EPDNorge: Construction / Solid wood products
General comment on data set Specific data was used for processing of sawn timber, while generic data was used for the forestry and sawn timber. Transport from sawmill to Edsbyns production facility is specfic, while all other upstream transport is generic. Generic database were used for energy wares and small amount of auxiliary materials that are mainly from Gabi database version 2017.1 - 2023.2. LCA data for diesel is based on European average (EU28) in Gabi, i.e., an average of the used diesel within the European Union with 6% biobased components. The data quality has been assessed according to Annex E in EN 15804 and it can be concluded that the data quality for module A1-A3 is very good, while the data quality for module A4-D is good. The allocation are made in accordance with the provisions of EN15804. All impacts from the planning of boards are allocated to the main product. The sawmill and its multiple co-products are allocated based on their different economic values, except the drying process that is attributed to the intermediate product on physical premises. The economic value of the different parts of the input round timber are attributed using the market value of its final products/co-products. If planed: The shavings is sold and only attributed to its upstream impact from its previously processes A conservative approach (double accounting) is used for transport (module A2) of round timber to the sawmill based on economic allocation factors as oulined in cPCR EN16485. 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 process are included, hence the few limited cut off that occurs (<<1%): Packaging materials that is 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 material is 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 2030
Time representativeness description 2025-03-31 - 2030-03-31
Technological representativeness
Technology description including background system Products are manufactured according to NCS Nordic Certified Scantlings Windows and Doors, and can be delivered with FSC and PEFC certification. The raw dry mass for pine is 420 kg/m3 as Swedish averages and used here to calculate biogenic carbon content and the delivery density including water according to the current moisture content. Conversion factor: 504,6 kg/m3

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
  • 1.7E+3
  • 8.82
  • 85.4
  • 0.125
  • 1.48
  • 2.17
  • 0
  • 7.56E+3
Input
  • 8.65E+3
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -8.65E+3
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 1.03E+4
  • 8.82
  • 85.4
  • 0.125
  • 1.48
  • -8.65E+3
  • 0
  • 7.56E+3
Input
  • 1.44E+3
  • 158
  • 82.1
  • 2.25
  • 26.6
  • 38.8
  • 0
  • -1.35E+3
Input
  • 34.3
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -34.3
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 1.47E+3
  • 158
  • 82.1
  • 2.25
  • 26.6
  • 4.52
  • 0
  • -1.35E+3
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -5.54E+3
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -1.5E+3
Input
  • 1.84
  • 0.0101
  • 0.0926
  • 0.000143
  • 0.0017
  • 0.00248
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0.0569
  • 7.97E-9
  • 0.00288
  • 1.13E-10
  • 1.34E-9
  • 1.96E-9
  • 0
  • -3.7E-8
Output
  • 0.00242
  • 0.0235
  • 0.114
  • 0.000334
  • 0.00395
  • 0.00577
  • 0
  • -0.748
Output
  • 0.276
  • 0.000191
  • 0.0138
  • 0.00000272
  • 0.0000322
  • 0.000047
  • 0
  • -0.251
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 1.92
  • 0
  • 0.0975
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0.482
  • 0
  • 27.6
  • 0
  • 0
  • 505
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Output
  • 0
  • 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)
  • 1.48E+3
  • 158
  • 84.5
  • 2.24
  • 26.6
  • 38.8
  • 0
  • -1.97E+3
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.0000857
  • 9.04E-7
  • 0.00000434
  • 1.28E-8
  • 1.52E-7
  • 2.22E-7
  • 0
  • -0.0000135
Acidification potential, Accumulated Exceedance (AP)
  • 0.354
  • 0.0635
  • 0.0218
  • 0.000902
  • 0.0107
  • 0.0156
  • 0
  • -0.436
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • -826
  • 0.148
  • 0.0095
  • 0.0021
  • 0.0248
  • 821
  • 0
  • 11.1
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 54.4
  • 11.7
  • 3.47
  • 0.167
  • 1.97
  • 2.88
  • 0
  • -213
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • -771
  • 12
  • 3.52
  • 0.17
  • 2.01
  • 824
  • 0
  • -202
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0.364
  • 0.0972
  • 0.0244
  • 0.00138
  • 0.0163
  • 0.0239
  • 0
  • -0.0037
  • 55
  • 11.85
  • 3.51
  • 0.1679
  • 1.985
  • 3
  • 0
  • -213.1
Eutrophication potential - freshwater (EP-freshwater)
  • 0.00134
  • 0.0000352
  • 0.0000695
  • 5.01E-7
  • 0.00000592
  • 0.00000865
  • 0
  • -0.000413
Eutrophication potential - marine (EP-marine)
  • 0.159
  • 0.0335
  • 0.0101
  • 0.000476
  • 0.00563
  • 0.00822
  • 0
  • -0.00689
Eutrophication potential - terrestrial (EP-terrestrial)
  • 1.6
  • 0.371
  • 0.104
  • 0.00526
  • 0.0623
  • 0.091
  • 0
  • 0.0862
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
  • 0.377
  • 0.0645
  • 0.023
  • 0.000916
  • 0.0108
  • 0.0158
  • 0
  • -0.045
Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP)
  • 1.2E-7
  • 0
  • 6.01E-9
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -0.00000135
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 23.1
  • 0.103
  • 1.16
  • 0.00146
  • 0.0173
  • 0.0253
  • 0
  • -3.92E+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
  • 32.1
  • 0.0274
  • 1.61
  • 0.000389
  • 0.00461
  • 0.00673
  • 0
  • -31.5
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 0.00000201
  • 2.38E-7
  • 1.16E-7
  • 3.39E-9
  • 4.01E-8
  • 5.85E-8
  • 0
  • 0.0176
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 6.43E+4
  • 54.3
  • 3.22E+3
  • 0.771
  • 9.12
  • 13.3
  • 0
  • -401
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 0.00000361
  • 1.28E-7
  • 1.89E-7
  • 1.82E-9
  • 2.15E-8
  • 3.14E-8
  • 0
  • -0.00000251
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 4.87E-8
  • 2.31E-9
  • 2.59E-9
  • 3.3E-11
  • 3.88E-10
  • 5.66E-10
  • 0
  • -1.38E-8
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • 8.1E+2
  • 114
  • 47.9
  • 1.62
  • 19.2
  • 28
  • 0
  • -694