Life cycle assessment of a preservative treated wooden deck

ABSTRACT

This study compares the environmental impacts of various durability scenarios of a case-study wood structure, including variations on wood species, preservative products and treatment methods. The method applied in this study compared the environmental impacts of various durability scenarios exposed to use class 3.1 during 30 years. Durability scenarios vary in terms of wood species (Softwoods – Cryptomeria, Spruce and Maritime pine; and Hardwoods – Eucalyptus), treatment methods (superficial (ST) and pressurized (PT)), and preservative products (solvent-based insecticide and fungicide – used for ST, and water-based biocide – used for PT). The system boundary included: preservatives production, sawn wood production, application of preservative treatment, use and end-of-life. The environmental impacts were calculated with the methodology given by EN 15804+A2. Eucalyptus and Spruce species do not have enough durability for the defined use class even when treated with pressurized methods. The results show that softwoods treated with ST have the lowest impacts on the majority of impact categories, followed by Maritime pine treated with PT. The majority of impacts categories are mainly influenced by treatment and wood production. The emissions during the use and end-of-life stages have a high influence on “Eco-toxicity (freshwater)” and “Human toxicity, cancer effects” categories, respectively.

KEYWORDS:

• Life cycle assessment
• preservative products
• superficial treatments
• pressurized treatments
• durability design

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) for the PhD scholarships (PD/BD/135159/2017 and PD/BD/113786/2015) awarded to André Dias and Pedro Santos within the scope of the Eco-Construction and Rehabilitation Doctoral Programme. The authors also acknowledge the support of the Foundation for Science and Technology, CERIS and ISISE Research Centres, University of Coimbra and Instituto Superior Técnico.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The authors would like to thank the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) for the PhD scholarships (PD/BD/135159/2017 and PD/BD/113786/2015) awarded to André Dias and Pedro Santos within the scope of the Eco-Construction and Rehabilitation Doctoral Programme.