Harmonisation framework for health based evaluation of indoor emissions from construction products in the European Union using the EU-LCI concept

This report describes a harmonised procedure for establishing a list of compounds and their associated LCI (Lowest Concentration of Interest) values for the evaluation of emissions from construction products taking into account existing procedures used in some Member States (i.e. ANSES in France and AgBB in Germany). It provides an appropriate health‐protective, science-based and transparent yet pragmatic approach with a flexible framework that enables review of the procedure to take into account new knowledge (e.g. data resulting from the REACH implementation process) for future revision of the EU-LCI master list in terms of both the compounds listed and their EU-LCI values.JRC.I.1-Chemical Assessment and Testin

Which additional impact categories are ready for uptake in the CEN standards EN 15804 and EN 15978? Evaluation framework and intermediate results

The European standards developed by CEN TC350 for assessing the sustainability of construction works, i.e. EN15804 (construction products) and EN15978 (buildings), consider seven impact categories within the life cycle assessment approach. When looking at commonly used Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods (e.g. IMPACT 2002+ and ReCiPe) and the recently developed Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) of the European Commission, more impact categories are included. Scientific studies indicate the necessity to consider these additional impact categories. The question arises if declaring solely the seven CEN TC350 impact categories is sufficient or if additional impact categories should be taken up. In the context of this potential need for a broader environmental perspective, a new work item proposal within CEN TC350 has been approved for drafting a CEN Technical Report (TR) containing an overview and evaluation of additional impact categories. The goal of the TR is to collect information on six impact categories: human toxicity, ecotoxicity, particulate matter, ionising radiation, land use/biodiversity and water scarcity. The TR can be used as input for further discussions on the need for updating the standards. The draft TR was finalised in January 2016 on the basis of literature study and feedback from experts, amongst others the EC-Joint Research Centre. The process of the development of the TR and the framework for the evaluation of the seven additional impact categories (and potentially others in future) are described. Finally, the main draft conclusions on the impact categories are summarised.We thank the members of the CEN TC WG1 and WG3, the EC-JRC and all experts involved for their valuable inputsstatus: publishe

Environmental Product Declarations entering the building sector - critical reflections based on 5 years experience in different European countries

Purpose Growing awareness of the environmental performanceof construction products and buildings brings aboutthe need for a suitable method to assess their environmentalperformance. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has become awidely recognised and accepted method to assess the burdensand impacts throughout the life cycle. This LCA-based information may be in the form of environmental product declarations (EPD) or product environmental footprints (PEF), based on reliable and verifiable information. All of these use LCA to quantify and report several environmental impact categorie and may also provide additional information. To better understand on the one hand existing EPD programmes (EN 15804) for each country and on the other the recent developments in terms of EU reference document (e.g. PEF), the authors decided to write this review paper based on the outcomes of the EPD workshop that was held prior to SB13 Graz conference.Methods This paper presents the state of the art in LCA and an overview of the EPD programmes in five European countries(Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland) based on the workshop in the first part and a comprehensive description and comparison of the PEF method and EN 15804 in the second part. In the last part, a general conclusion will wrap up the findings and results will provide a further outlook on future activities.Results and discussion The high number of EPD programmesunderlines the fact that there is obviously a demand for assessments of the environmental performance of construction materials.In the comparison between and experiences of thedifferent countries, it can be seen that more similarities than differences exist. A comparison between PEF and EPD shows differences, e.g. LCIA impact categories and recyclingmethodology. Conclusions Independent of raising awareness of the construction material environmental performance, the existence of somany environmental claims calls for clarification andharmonisation. Additionally, construction materials beingassessed in the voluntary approaches have to follow theharmonised approach following the principles of the EuropeanConstruction Products Regulation (regulated) not to foster barriers of trade. The authors therefore highly appreciate the most recent activities of the sustainability of construction works (CEN/TC 350 committee http://portailgroupe.afnor.fr/public_espacenormalisation/CENTC350/index.html) currently workingon these issues at the EU level. Finally, the LCA community is further encouraged to increase the background life cycleinventory data and life cycle inventory modelling as well as the meaningfulness of certain environmental impact categories, such as toxicity, land use, biodiversity and resource usage

Acute mood effect of donepezil in young, healthy volunteers

Objective Chronic use of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor donepezil has been found to improve mood or to induce mania/hypomania in many neuropsychiatric patients with altered cholinergic and dopaminergic tone. Our aim was to determine whether acutely administered donepezil would alter mood in volunteers with no such alterations. Methods This investigation was a double-blind, crossover design study of 15 young, healthy male participants who were allocated in random order to three oral treatments: placebo and 5-mg and 7.5-mg donepezil (doses which exert clinical and acute cognitive effects without considerable peripheral side effects). At the theoretical peak-plasma concentrations of donepezil, volunteers rated how they felt on validated questionnaires, which included various dimensions of subjective feelings. We also assessed changes in brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which is increased by donepezil after chronic regimes and is related to modulation of mood. Results Donepezil significantly increased ratings of vigour and anxiety symptoms (medium effect sizes). No changes in bodily symptoms or BDNF were observed. Conclusions Acute donepezil administration in participants with unaltered cholinergic and dopaminergic tone led to positive and negative changes in affect. These results call for further research on the direct mood effects of donepezil. Copyright (c) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Associacao Fundo de Incentivo a Pesquisa (AFIP)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Universidade Federal de São Paulo UNIFESP, Dept Psicobiol, São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo UNIFESP, Dept Psicobiol, São Paulo, BrazilFAPESP: 2010/08840-0Web of Scienc

Environmental product declarations entering the building sector ::critical reflections based on 5 to 10 years experience in different European countries

Growing awareness of the environmental performance of construction products and buildings brings about the need for a suitable method to assess their environmental performance. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has become a widely recognised and accepted method to assess the burdens and impacts throughout the life cycle. This LCA-based information may be in the form of environmental product declarations (EPD) or product environmental footprints (PEF), based on reliable and verifiable information. All of these use LCA to quantify and report several environmental impact categories and may also provide additional information. To better understand on the one hand existing EPD programmes (EN 15804) for each country and on the other the recent developments in terms of EU reference document (e.g. PEF), the authors decided to write this review paper based on the outcomes of the EPD workshop that was held prior to SB13 Graz conference. This paper presents the state of the art in LCA and an overview of the EPD programmes in five European countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland) based on the workshop in the first part and a comprehensive description and comparison of the PEF method and EN 15804 in the second part. In the last part, a general conclusion will wrap up the findings and results will provide a further outlook on future activities. The high number of EPD programmes underlines the fact that there is obviously a demand for assessments of the environmental performance of construction materials. In the comparison between and experiences of the different countries, it can be seen that more similarities than differences exist. A comparison between PEF and EPD shows differences, e.g. LCIA impact categories and recycling methodology. Independent of raising awareness of the construction material environmental performance, the existence of so many environmental claims calls for clarification and harmonisation. Additionally, construction materials being assessed in the voluntary approaches have to follow the harmonised approach following the principles of the European Construction Products Regulation (regulated) not to foster barriers of trade. The authors therefore highly appreciate the most recent activities of the sustainability of construction works (CEN/TC 350 committee http://portailgroupe.afnor.fr/public_espacenormalisation/CENTC350/index.html) currently working on these issues at the EU level. Finally, the LCA community is further encouraged to increase the background life cycle inventory data and life cycle inventory modelling as well as the meaningfulness of certain environmental impact categories, such as toxicity, land use, biodiversity and resource usage

Environmental product declarations entering the building sector: critical reflections based on 5 to 10 years experience in different European countries

Purpose Growing awareness of the environmental performanceof construction products and buildings brings aboutthe need for a suitable method to assess their environmentalperformance. Life cycle assessment (LCA) has become awidely recognised and accepted method to assess the burdensand impacts throughout the life cycle. This LCA-based information may be in the form of environmental product declarations (EPD) or product environmental footprints (PEF), based on reliable and verifiable information. All of these use LCA to quantify and report several environmental impact categorie and may also provide additional information. To better understand on the one hand existing EPD programmes (EN 15804) for each country and on the other the recent developments in terms of EU reference document (e.g. PEF), the authors decided to write this review paper based on the outcomes of the EPD workshop that was held prior to SB13 Graz conference.Methods This paper presents the state of the art in LCA and an overview of the EPD programmes in five European countries(Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Switzerland) based on the workshop in the first part and a comprehensive description and comparison of the PEF method and EN 15804 in the second part. In the last part, a general conclusion will wrap up the findings and results will provide a further outlook on future activities.Results and discussion The high number of EPD programmesunderlines the fact that there is obviously a demand for assessments of the environmental performance of construction materials.In the comparison between and experiences of thedifferent countries, it can be seen that more similarities than differences exist. A comparison between PEF and EPD shows differences, e.g. LCIA impact categories and recyclingmethodology. Conclusions Independent of raising awareness of the construction material environmental performance, the existence of somany environmental claims calls for clarification andharmonisation. Additionally, construction materials beingassessed in the voluntary approaches have to follow theharmonised approach following the principles of the EuropeanConstruction Products Regulation (regulated) not to foster barriers of trade. The authors therefore highly appreciate the most recent activities of the sustainability of construction works (CEN/TC 350 committee http://portailgroupe.afnor.fr/public_espacenormalisation/CENTC350/index.html) currently workingon these issues at the EU level. Finally, the LCA community is further encouraged to increase the background life cycleinventory data and life cycle inventory modelling as well as the meaningfulness of certain environmental impact categories, such as toxicity, land use, biodiversity and resource usage