Interest in intrinsically low-energy construction materials is becoming mainstream, and bio-based materials form a key part of that group of materials. The goal of this study was to analyse the environmental impact of applying a sol-gel coating on hemp shiv, in order to improve the durability of this innovative bio-based material, using a regionalised LCA model, taking into account regional specific peculiarities. This study analysed the environmental performance of using bio-based materials in the building envelope compared with traditional synthetic construction materials, and compared the impact of a regionalised approach with a global approach. The carbon footprint of treated hemp shiv in a wall with a U-value of 0.15 W/m².K was compared to untreated hempcrete and a reference cavity wall with the same U-value. Considering the environmental damage caused by the production of hemp shiv, nitrogen fertiliser was the hotspot. The LCA results showed that, using innovative bio-based materials in construction, treated hemp shiv with sol-gel can decrease the carbon footprint of a building envelope through carbon sequestration. Using the more accurate site-specific information in life cycle inventory and impact assessment methods will result in more consistent and site-appropriate environmental results for decision-making.

Research Highlights: This is the first study that analyzes the environmental performance of wood-based phase change material (PCM) panels. Background and Objectives: Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a powerful environmental management tool. However, a full LCA, especially during the early design phase of a product, is far too time and data intensive for industrial companies to conduct during their production and consumption processes. Therefore, there is an increasing demand for simpler methods to demonstrate a company’s resource efficiency potential without being data or time intensive. The goal of this study is to investigate the suitability of streamlined LCA (SLCA) tools and methods used in the building material industry, and to assess their robustness in the case study of a wood-based PCM panel. Materials and Methods: The Bilan Produit tool was selected as the SLCA tool and a matrix LCA was selected as the most commonly used SLCA method. A specific case study of a wood-based PCM panel was selected with a focus on its application in building construction in the province of Québec. Results: As a semi-quantitative LCA method, the matrix LCA provided a quick screening of the product life cycle and its hotspot stages, i.e., life cycle stages with high impact. However, the results of the full LCA and SLCA tools were quantitative and based on scientific databases. The use of the PCM panel and heating energy had the highest environmental impacts as compared to other inputs. The results of the full LCA and SLCA also identified energy consumption as a hotspot. Insufficient material or processes in the SLCA databases was one of the reasons for the difference between the results of the SLCA and full LCA. Conclusions: The examined SLCA methods provided proper explanations for the bio-based material in construction, but several limitations still exist, and the methods should be improved to make them more robust when implemented in such a specific sector.

Life Cycle Costing (LCC) is universally accepted as the method of choice for economic assessment in Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) but the singular focus on costs is ineffective in representing the multiple facets of economic sustainability. This review intends to identify other economic indicators to potentially complement the use of LCC in LCSA. Papers for the review were identified in the Web of Science Core Collection database for the years 2010–2021. The shortlisted indicators were analyzed using 18 criteria. The 21 indicators analyzed performed well with respect to the review criteria for indicator methodology and use but most are unsuitable for direct integration into the LCC/LCSA framework due to the inability to aggregate across life cycles and a lack of correspondingly granular data. The indicators were grouped into six economic impact categories—profitability, productivity, innovation, stability, customers, and autonomy—each of which represents a significant aspect of economic sustainability. On this basis, a conceptual framework is proposed that could maintain the utility of LCC while integrating additional indicators to enable more holistic economic assessments in LCSA. Considering additional economic indicators in LCSA ensures that the positive aspects of LCC are preserved while also improving economic assessment in LCSA.

The field crop industry in Canada is a source of both significant economic benefits and environmental impacts. Environmental impacts include land and energy use, as well as greenhouse gas (GHG) and other emissions. Impacts also accrue upstream of the field in the product supply chain, from the production of such inputs as fertilizers and pesticides. There are currently two types of environmental life cycle assessment (LCA)—attributional LCA (ALCA) and consequential LCA (CLCA)—that may be used to study the life cycle impacts of products such as field crops. ALCA is a retrospective methodology that presents a snapshot of average, “status quo” conditions. CLCA is a prospective methodology that presents the potential implications of changes in a product system, including any associated market-mediated changes in supply or demand in other product systems. Thus, CLCAs can be used to assess large-scale changes in the field crop industry, including its relationship to other sectors and processes, such as the production of biofuel or of food for both human and animal consumption. The aim of this paper is to review and curate the knowledge derived through published CLCA studies that assessed the impacts of changes to field crop production systems on the life cycle resource use and emissions associated with the agricultural products, with a focus on their relevance to temperate climate conditions. The current study also highlights how previous studies, including ALCAs and farm management recommendations, can be used to inform the changes that should be studied using CLCA. The main challenges to conducting CLCAs include identifying the system boundaries, marginal products and processes that would be impacted by changes to field crop production. Marginal markets and product systems to include can be determined using economic equilibrium models, or information from local experts and industry reports. In order to conduct ISO-compliant CLCAs, it is necessary to include multiple relevant environmental impact categories, and to perform robust data quality and uncertainty analyses.