PUR-temadag, 30. maj - Oliver Loebel (PU Europe)

1. Symposium
POYURETHANES ISOLERER BEDRE
Environmental and cost performance of
PU solutions in low energy buildings
Nyborg, 30/05/2013
Oliver Loebel, PU Europe
Secretary General
PU solutions in low energy buildings

2. Who we are
• PU Europe is the European association
representing the PU (PUR/PIR) insulation
industry;
• Insulation boards, sandwich panels, spray foam,
insulation cores for building blocks, technical
insulation, SIPs,
2
insulation, SIPs,
district heating pipes;
• PU is the high
performance insulant
particularly suited
for nearly zero
energy buildings.

3. “Sustainable buildings” must strike the best
balance between minimising environmental impacts
and life cycle costs while stimulating social
development.
What is a sustainable building?
3

4. PU is the most efficient, commonly
available insulation product, …
… but what
about
environmental
and cost
4
and cost
performance?

5. Notice:
• All data used in this study come from an
LCA / LCC study performed by PwC on
behalf of PU Europe;
5
behalf of PU Europe;
• The methodology uses recognised European
standards.
• All product data were taken from certified
Environmental Product Declarations.

6. The city of Oldtown has big plans ….
Renovating and insulating
the roof of the town hall
Building a new sport centre
6
But Oldtown does not only want to build energy
efficient but also environmentally friendly.
And that’s, where the trouble starts…..

7. In the night, the project manager has a dream…
If you want to protect
the environment, take
natural or mineral
insulation products.
PU products are oil-
based. They can’t be
environmentally
friendly!
But all insulants have
7
Do not simply
believe this, but
ask for evidence!
But all insulants have
an impact on the
environment. We just
have to find a method
to compare them.

8. The following morning, the project manager
decided to look deeper in this matter …
Use European standards EN
15643-2, EN 15978, EN
8
15643-2, EN 15978, EN
15643-4 and EPDs.
Is there a method
to quantify
environmental and
cost performance?
Yeah, but that’s
complicated.

9. Environmental indicators:
• Input: Resource depletion, primary energy demand
• Output: Climate change, eutrophication, acidification,
This is indeed complex, but it is
the only way to make an informed
choice. Let’s look at the following
indicators.
9
• Output: Climate change, eutrophication, acidification,
photochemical ozone formation, waste
Cost indicators:
• Construction: Products, transport, installation etc.
• Use: Energy / water / repair / replacement
• End-of-life: Disposal

10. Town hall
Pitched roof renovation: U= 0.16 W/m2.K
Aren’t you cheating
when you compare
different build-ups?
Different
solutions
for different
insulants:
PU, stone
fibre, glass
fibre and
10
No, the build-ups are
promoted by the producers
and take account of the
characteristics of each
material.
fibre and
wood fibre
Example:
PU (above
rafters) and
glass fibre
(between
and below
rafters)

11. Pitched roof renovation
Preliminary Environmental Assessment
82% 145%
16%
12%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
160%
Total primary energy
Abiotic depletionEutrophication
Normalised LCA results (level of European inhabitant)
11
Environmental performances similar for all insulation solutions.
99%
72%
37%
16%
0%
Non hazardous waste
Climate changeAcidification
Photochemical ozone
formation
PU SW GW WF

12. Pitched roof renovation
Life Cycle Cost Assessment
12
PU solution
significantly less
expensive.

13. Surface:
ca.2800m2
Similar
Sport centre
New flat roof: U= 0.18 W/m2.K
13
Similar
build-up
for each
insulation
type: PU
and stone
fibre

14. 300,0
400,0
500,0
600,0
GWP[teq.CO2]
New flat roof
Preliminary Environmental Assessment
14
0,0
100,0
200,0
Helsinki PU Helsinki SW Brussels PU Brussels SW Rome PU Rome SW
GWP
Steel Insulation
PU has significantly lower global warming potential* than the stone
fibre solution thanks to lighter and more efficient insulation layer and
10% lighter steel structure
* Other
environmental
indicators not yet
available
2800m2

15. New flat roof
Life Cycle Cost Assessment
15
Similar investment costs for both solutions.

16. Similar
build-up
for each
insulation
type: PU
Sport centre
New sandwich panel walls
16
type: PU
and stone
fibre

17. New sandwich panel walls
Preliminary Environmental Assessment
0,50
1,00
1,50
2,00
GWP
APODP
Normalised LCA results (level of European inhabitant)
17
Very good performance of PU solution in most impact
categories thanks to lower density and thickness.
0,00
POCPEP
PU panel Stone fiber panel

18. New sandwich panel walls
Life Cycle Cost Assessment
18
PU solution about 10% less expensive.

19. And after all these calculations ….
Nonsense. Now you
are oversimplifying a
complex matter!
19
And the
winner is ……PU !!!

20. Our Conclusions
• Sustainability performance of insulation solutions
depends on end-use application;
• Comparing impacts “per kg” is incorrect due to “knock-
on” effects at the building level.
• Environmental performance of insulation solutions are
20
• Environmental performance of insulation solutions are
fairly similar in applications like pitched roof;
• PU can show superiour environmental performance,
when specific mechanical properties are required (flat
roof, sandwich panels);
• PU solutions are very cost competitive;
• These results cannot be extrapolated to all
applications, design solutions, impact categories and
climatic zones, but general trend is confirmed.

21. Watch live the construction of a
passive house in Brussels
Polyurethane passive house
in Brussels
21
www.polyurethanes.org/passivehouse
• Offer policy makers the
possibility to visit house
during construction and use;
• Verify satisfaction levels

22. Thank you for your attention
www.pu-europe.euwww.pu-europe.eu
www.excellence-in-insulation.eu
While all the information and recommendations in this publication are to the best of our knowledge, information and belief accurate at the
date of publication, nothing herein is to be construed as a warranty, express or otherwise. In all cases, it is the responsibility of the user to
determine the applicability of such information.