Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: ACEMat™ (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location TW
Geographical representativeness description Almost all the datasets selected for the LCA refer to the RoW as the geographical reference, as there were no specific environmental profiles available.
Reference year 2021
Name
ACEMat™
Use advice for data set The results table shown on the ÖKOBAUDAT refers to the product ACEMat™ R with the specific mass of 0.27 kg/m^2.
Technical purpose of product or process ACEMat™, woven into mesh structures with rectangular pyramid patterns, has shown effectiveness in erosion control and channel protection. This TRM is especially useful in civil engineering for stabilizing slopes. Rain impact can dislodge topsoil, exposing roots and foundations, thus destabilizing slopes. ACEMat™ not only enhances slope filtration and stabilization but also encourages vegetation growth, offering robust soil and rock slope erosion resistance. In environmental restoration, ACEMat™'s ability to promote vegetation and retain soil makes it a key tool, especially given rising concerns over land degradation. Additionally, these mats are used in constructing channels and swales where they reduce erosion and support vegetation. Research is underway to evaluate their potential in optimizing hydraulic efficiency and maintaining channel bed integrity. Their relevance is growing in stormwater management, as they could mitigate runoff and facilitate water infiltration, contributing to sustainable practices, particularly as climate-related challenges like increased precipitation become more common.
Classification number 6.6.07
Classification
Class name : Hierarchy level
  • OEKOBAU.DAT: 6.6.07 Plastics / Foils and fleeces / Technical textiles
General comment on data set The owner of this EPD shall be liable for the underlying information and evidence. The programme operator Kiwa-Ecobility Experts shall not be liable with respect to manufacturer data, life cycle assessment data and evidence.
Scenarios
  • Scenario: Standard scenario (Default) - Almost all the datasets selected for the LCA refer to the RoW as the geographical reference, as there were no specific environmental profiles available. Gold-Joint delivers its product to different countries, so the calculation of transport to construction site (A4) was done by taking the average distance, weighted by the proportion of product shipped to each country. For module A4, a data set for a non-specific truck and a transoceanic ship was used. A scaling method was used to calculate the LCA results for the different ACEMat™ products. The scaling was done on the basis of mass per square meter. As a result of scaling there are results for both the fixed and the scalable part of the scaling function. The fixed part means that this number is the same for each product in the product group and the scalable part is the part that depends on the mass per unit area of the product. In order to calculate the correct number of each environmental impact category for each of the products in the product group, the following calculation should be done: [number fixed part]+([specific mass]*[number scalable part]). The input cardboard tube did not have a linear dependence on the specific mass, so the higher quantity of product available was always taken into account to make the scaling as conservative as possible. The input cardboard tube was not having a linear dependance on the specific mass, thus the higher amount of the product available was always considered for the scaling to be as conservative as possible. For C1 the method and amount of the generic data set 'Polyester weefsel' from chapter 22.46 Grondwapening en grondscheiding of the DuboCalc programme (database version NMD 1.8 - 5.01.14052018) was used. In this generic data set, 0.0013h work per m² of geotextile was assumed.
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
Material properties of the reference flow
    • layer thickness: 0.007 m
    • grammage: 0.27 kg/m^2
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2028
Time representativeness description All process-specific data was collected for the 2021 operating year and is therefore up-to-date. The data is based on the annual average.
Technological representativeness
Technology description including background system ACEMat™ is a Turf Reinforcement Mat (TRM) made of high-strength polypropylene monofilament. With its stable and thick three-dimensional woven structures, ACEMat™ is highly effective in controlling severe erosion problems in steep slopes, barren areas, riverbanks, channels, and areas with heavy rainfall. It interlocks with soil to create a solid base, dissipating run-off and stream erosive forces while protecting the soil surface from water splash and wash. Furthermore, it retains seeds and supports plants when vegetation is required, providing exceptional erosion control and enhanced vegetation performance. The primary material for ACEMat™, PP monofilament, is produced by thoroughly mixing and stirring various plastic pellets, followed by extrusion and stretching processes. After the PP monofilament undergoes the arranging process, it is ready to be fed into the production line for weaving ACEMat™. Weaving is a method of fabric production where two distinct sets of yarn interlace at right angles, forming a longitudinal warp direction (machine direction) and a transversal weft direction (cross-machine direction). Through careful textile design, ACEMat™ displays a rectangular arrangement on its surface. After the fabric undergoes heat shrinking, the yarn forms a three-dimensional rectangular pyramid-like structure. Upon passing visual inspection, the fabric is cut to the required lengths, rolled onto paper tubes for packaging, and then stored in the warehouse. The construction process for the turf reinforcement mat, ACEMat™, can be categorized into the following stages: Preparation of the site; Placement of ACEMat™; Execution of anchorage process; Implementation of hydroseeding process.
Flow diagram(s) or picture(s)
  • Flow chart ACEMat™ Image

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Raw material supply
A1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A2
Standard scenario (Default)
Manufacturing
A3
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A4
Standard scenario (Default)
Installation
A5
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
  • 0
  • 0
Exported electrical energy (EEE)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.09883
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1.54
Exported thermal energy (EET)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.1702
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 2.651
Hazardous waste disposed (HWD)
Output
  • 0.00000228
  • 3.409E-9
  • 0.000003047
  • 0.000001474
  • 0.000007313
  • 0.000002553
  • 1.557E-7
  • 7.814E-7
  • 2.638E-8
  • -0.000007681
Materials for energy recovery (MER)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for recycling (MFR)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.01014
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.01383
  • 0
  • 0
Use of net fresh water (FW)
Input
  • 0.006019
  • 1.639E-7
  • 0.002558
  • 0.0001068
  • 0.02396
  • 0.00004826
  • 0.000007483
  • 0.0007793
  • 0.00001811
  • -0.0006966
Non hazardous waste dispose (NHWD)
Output
  • 0.03327
  • 0.00008534
  • 0.03284
  • 0.03228
  • 0.09784
  • 0.00111
  • 0.003897
  • 0.0101
  • 0.06931
  • -0.003419
Use of non renewable primary energy (PENRE)
Input
  • 10.71
  • 0.001428
  • 8.116
  • 0.7884
  • 17.18
  • 0.9955
  • 0.06522
  • 0.4308
  • 0.01845
  • -7.102
Use of non renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PENRM)
Input
  • 11.63
  • 0
  • 1.184
  • 0
  • 0.6407
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • -0.6167
Use of non renewable secondary fuels (NRSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Radioactive waste disposed (RWD)
Output
  • 0.00000619
  • 8.835E-9
  • 0.00001924
  • 0.000004867
  • 0.00001301
  • 0.000006509
  • 4.034E-7
  • 0.000001457
  • 1.031E-7
  • -0.000003481
Use of renewable primary energy (PERE)
Input
  • 0.2348
  • 0.00001684
  • 0.395
  • 0.01109
  • 0.4895
  • 0.00507
  • 0.000769
  • 0.04099
  • 0.0003071
  • -0.1383
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PERM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of renewable secondary fuels (RSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of secondary material (SM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of non renewable primary energy resource (PENRT)
Input
  • 22.34
  • 0.001428
  • 9.3
  • 0.7884
  • 17.82
  • 0.9955
  • 0.06522
  • 0.4308
  • 0.01845
  • -7.718
Total use of renewable primary energy resources (PERT)
Input
  • 0.2348
  • 0.00001684
  • 0.395
  • 0.01109
  • 0.4895
  • 0.00507
  • 0.000769
  • 0.04099
  • 0.0003071
  • -0.1383

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A2
Standard scenario (Default)
Manufacturing
A3
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A4
Standard scenario (Default)
Installation
A5
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)
  • 0.6639
  • 0.00008928
  • 0.5949
  • 0.05026
  • 1.465
  • 0.06813
  • 0.004076
  • 0.5266
  • 0.01026
  • -0.3862
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • 0.000734
  • 4.118E-8
  • -0.00242
  • 0.00003111
  • 0.01807
  • 0.00001894
  • 0.00000188
  • 0.00007545
  • 0.000007899
  • -0.0002448
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • 0.663
  • 0.00008921
  • 0.5972
  • 0.05021
  • 1.447
  • 0.06811
  • 0.004073
  • 0.5265
  • 0.01025
  • -0.3859
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0.0002006
  • 3.269E-8
  • 0.0001156
  • 0.00002079
  • 0.000245
  • 0.000005368
  • 0.000001492
  • 0.00004222
  • 3.624E-7
  • -0.00002409
  • 1.295E-8
  • 1.969E-11
  • 2.486E-8
  • 1.07E-8
  • 2.451E-8
  • 1.471E-8
  • 8.99E-10
  • 1.589E-8
  • 2.267E-10
  • -4.715E-8
  • 0.002085
  • 5.739E-7
  • 0.00119
  • 0.0004464
  • 0.002882
  • 0.0009487
  • 0.0000262
  • 0.0001923
  • 0.000009
  • -0.0004172
  • 0.002653
  • 5.174E-7
  • 0.002441
  • 0.0005896
  • 0.004887
  • 0.0007124
  • 0.00002362
  • 0.0002348
  • 0.000006394
  • -0.0003974
  • 0.005034
  • 0.00000201
  • 0.003755
  • 0.001631
  • 0.008619
  • 0.003451
  • 0.00009177
  • 0.0007159
  • 0.00002352
  • -0.001165
  • 0.00001422
  • 8.999E-10
  • 0.00001775
  • 5.922E-7
  • 0.00001364
  • 2.48E-7
  • 4.109E-8
  • 0.000001566
  • 1.315E-8
  • -9.1E-7
  • 0.0004518
  • 1.823E-7
  • 0.0003373
  • 0.0001463
  • 0.001468
  • 0.0003145
  • 0.000008324
  • 0.00006427
  • 0.000003875
  • -0.000106
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 0.2445
  • 0.000004814
  • 0.09142
  • 0.003258
  • 1.003
  • 0.001256
  • 0.0002198
  • 0.02647
  • 0.0007433
  • -0.04931
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0.00000607
  • 2.26E-9
  • 0.000001364
  • 8.788E-7
  • 0.000002653
  • 1.045E-7
  • 1.032E-7
  • 6.667E-7
  • 7.847E-9
  • -3.585E-7
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 20.83
  • 0.001345
  • 8.746
  • 0.7426
  • 16.6
  • 0.9374
  • 0.06143
  • 0.4054
  • 0.01736
  • -6.992

IndicatorUnit Raw material supply
A1
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A2
Standard scenario (Default)
Manufacturing
A3
Standard scenario (Default)
Transport
A4
Standard scenario (Default)
Installation
A5
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
  • 1.528E-10
  • 3.892E-14
  • 1.504E-10
  • 2.006E-11
  • 5.808E-10
  • 1.975E-11
  • 1.777E-12
  • 1.086E-10
  • 4.842E-13
  • -3.031E-11
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 4.809E-9
  • 1.312E-12
  • 4.302E-9
  • 6.204E-10
  • 4.991E-9
  • 4.853E-10
  • 5.992E-11
  • 2.092E-9
  • 1.201E-11
  • -5.01E-10
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 2.167E-8
  • 8.025E-12
  • 7.944E-9
  • 3.555E-9
  • 5.154E-8
  • 1.888E-8
  • 3.664E-10
  • 1.903E-9
  • 1.206E-10
  • -1.707E-9
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 0.00668
  • 0.000005637
  • 0.02171
  • 0.003167
  • 0.0132
  • 0.004017
  • 0.0002574
  • 0.001659
  • 0.00006792
  • -0.002616
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • 7.804
  • 0.0012
  • 7.125
  • 0.6121
  • 5.668
  • 0.5651
  • 0.05478
  • 6.531
  • 0.01846
  • -0.5108
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 0.7475
  • 0.001167
  • 1.152
  • 0.4727
  • 1.557
  • 0.1196
  • 0.05327
  • 0.1493
  • 0.04103
  • -0.7492