Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: Aluminium covered balcony doors and entrance doors outward / inward opened 55 mm sash (BYKO – DA55) (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location LV
Geographical representativeness description Geographical reference space of the background data is Latvia.
Reference year 2019
Name
Aluminium covered balcony doors and entrance doors outward / inward opened 55 mm sash (BYKO – DA55)
Use advice for data set The intended uses are in domestic and commercial locations.
Technical purpose of product or process The intended uses are in domestic and commercial locations.
Classification number 7.6.03
Classification
Class name : Hierarchy level
  • OEKOBAU.DAT: 7.6.03 Components for windows and curtain walls / Doors / Wood
General comment on data set “Aluminium covered balcony door and entrance door, outward / in-ward opened, 55 mm sash” (BYKO-DA55) is double-glazed and has a thermal transmittance of 1,9 W/(m2*K). The dimensions (height x width) are made according to the customer's requirements. The calculation based on the assumption of The LCA results are scalable for the desired door dimension. The product is manufactured in Valmiera, Latvia, and marketed internationally. Kiwa-Ecobility Experts assumes no liability for manufacturer's information, LCA data and evidence.
Scenarios
  • Scenario: Standard scenario (Default) - All installed raw materials of the products were analysed and the masses were determined. Production-specific energy consumption were measured and provided by Bitus Latvia SIA. Supplier Information regarding the transport distances were provided by Bitus Latvia SIA. The production waste wood, metal and paint and other mixed production waste are collected separately. For plastics and steel, 100 per cent recycling is assumed, and for general production waste, 100 per cent landfilling is assumed, as waste incineration is not widespread in Latvia. Wood waste is thermally recovered at the site. For production waste that cannot be clearly allocated (seals, glass), a raw material-related production reject of 5 percent was calculated. As the product is marketed internationally, no country-specific waste scenario can be considered. Therefore, the waste scenario of PCR B (Appendix B.3) was adopted. Removing the door or window does not result in any environmental impacts, so the value for module C1 is assumed to be zero.
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2026
Time representativeness description 2019 annual average
Technological representativeness
Technology description including background system All hardware is screwed in the sashes and frames. Door can be side opened. The dimensions (height x width) are adapted according to customer requirements. The production phase (A3) consider the following processes: cutting of wood, preplanning, mould-ing and tapening, chiseling, wood frame impregnation, assembly of wood components, painting, assembly of glass and hardware, packaging.
Flow diagram(s) or picture(s)
  • flow chart production SIA-BYKO-LAT Image

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Raw material supply
A1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A2
Standard scenario (Default)
Manufacturing
A3
Standard scenario (Default)
De-construction
C1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
C2
Standard scenario (Default)
Waste processing
C3
Standard scenario (Default)
Disposal
C4
Standard scenario (Default)
Recycling Potential
D
Standard scenario (Default)
Components for re-use (CRU)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Exported electrical energy (EEE)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 7.13
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 59.3
Exported thermal energy (EET)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 12.3
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 102
Hazardous waste disposed (HWD)
Output
  • 0.0143
  • 0.0000382
  • 0.000158
  • 0
  • 0.0000065
  • 0.00000679
  • 8.36E-7
  • -0.00227
Materials for energy recovery (MER)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for recycling (MFR)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.293
  • 0
  • 0
  • 2.95
  • 0
  • 0
Use of net fresh water (FW)
Input
  • 0.629
  • 0.0114
  • 0.118
  • 0
  • 0.00193
  • 0.0116
  • 0.00211
  • -0.336
Non hazardous waste dispose (NHWD)
Output
  • 12.9
  • 3.66
  • 2.24
  • 0
  • 0.623
  • 0.263
  • 11.5
  • -7.48
Use of non renewable primary energy (PENRE)
Input
  • 887
  • 63.9
  • 259
  • 0
  • 10.9
  • 2.79
  • 1.98
  • -453
Use of non renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PENRM)
Input
  • 23.3
  • 0
  • 6.84
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of non renewable secondary fuels (NRSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Radioactive waste disposed (RWD)
Output
  • 0.00239
  • 0.000405
  • 0.00116
  • 0
  • 0.0000688
  • 0.0000092
  • 0.0000123
  • -0.000689
Use of renewable primary energy (PERE)
Input
  • 589
  • 0.63
  • 93.9
  • 0
  • 0.107
  • 0.119
  • 0.0286
  • -411
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PERM)
Input
  • 3.1E+2
  • 0
  • 39.6
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -0.0346
Use of renewable secondary fuels (RSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of secondary material (SM)
Input
  • 0.306
  • 0
  • 0.0306
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of non renewable primary energy resource (PENRT)
Input
  • 9.1E+2
  • 63.9
  • 266
  • 0
  • 10.9
  • 2.79
  • 1.98
  • -453
Total use of renewable primary energy resources (PERT)
Input
  • 899
  • 0.63
  • 133
  • 0
  • 0.107
  • 0.119
  • 0.0286
  • -411

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A2
Standard scenario (Default)
Manufacturing
A3
Standard scenario (Default)
De-construction
C1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
C2
Standard scenario (Default)
Waste processing
C3
Standard scenario (Default)
Disposal
C4
Standard scenario (Default)
Recycling Potential
D
Standard scenario (Default)
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • 13
  • 3.88
  • 9.72
  • 0
  • 0.661
  • 34.4
  • 0.186
  • -46.7
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • -65.9
  • 0.00113
  • -6.25
  • 0
  • 0.000192
  • 34
  • 0.122
  • 0.036
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 77.9
  • 3.88
  • 15.9
  • 0
  • 0.66
  • 0.406
  • 0.064
  • -46.5
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 1.06
  • 0.00115
  • 0.0863
  • 0
  • 0.000196
  • 0.0000824
  • 0.0000171
  • -0.186
  • 0.00000493
  • 9.03E-7
  • 0.00000254
  • 0
  • 1.54E-7
  • 3.42E-8
  • 2.67E-8
  • -0.00000174
  • 0.299
  • 0.0245
  • 0.0561
  • 0
  • 0.00417
  • 0.0103
  • 0.000671
  • -0.176
  • 0.598
  • 0.0222
  • 0.126
  • 0
  • 0.00377
  • 0.0075
  • 0.000582
  • -0.33
  • 1.08
  • 0.0862
  • 0.287
  • 0
  • 0.0147
  • 0.0395
  • 0.00225
  • -0.693
  • 0.00615
  • 0.0000583
  • 0.000491
  • 0
  • 0.00000991
  • 0.0000102
  • 0.00000116
  • -0.00179
  • 0.0933
  • 0.00779
  • 0.0184
  • 0
  • 0.00132
  • 0.00344
  • 0.000237
  • -0.0549
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 17.3
  • 0.428
  • 3.37
  • 0
  • 0.0728
  • 1.07
  • 0.0224
  • -7.41
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.000421
  • 0.000011
  • 0.0000195
  • 0
  • 0.00000186
  • 6.24E-7
  • 6.7E-8
  • -0.000128
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 851
  • 60.2
  • 248
  • 0
  • 10.2
  • 2.6
  • 1.86
  • -426

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A2
Standard scenario (Default)
Manufacturing
A3
Standard scenario (Default)
De-construction
C1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
C2
Standard scenario (Default)
Waste processing
C3
Standard scenario (Default)
Disposal
C4
Standard scenario (Default)
Recycling Potential
D
Standard scenario (Default)
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 Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 1.01E-7
  • 1.64E-9
  • 1.35E-8
  • 0
  • 2.78E-10
  • 7.01E-9
  • 2.82E-11
  • -6.24E-8
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 0.00000197
  • 5.5E-8
  • 1.37E-7
  • 0
  • 9.35E-9
  • 2.26E-8
  • 8.64E-10
  • -0.00000118
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 0.0000071
  • 3.52E-7
  • 0.00000116
  • 0
  • 5.99E-8
  • 6.13E-8
  • 1.17E-8
  • -0.00000388
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 2.21
  • 0.256
  • 1.22
  • 0
  • 0.0435
  • 0.00796
  • 0.00797
  • -0.652
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • 2.26E+3
  • 43.2
  • 162
  • 0
  • 7.35
  • 22.4
  • 77.9
  • -1.54E+3
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 6.08E+3
  • 50.2
  • 857
  • 0
  • 8.53
  • 0.965
  • 3.9
  • -1.77E+3