Environmental Product Declaration The Jetway Passenger ... › products › cert_pdfs › ... · 2000 Powell Street, Ste. 600, Emeryville, CA 94608 +1.510.452.8000 | ... Following

Environmental Product Declaration The Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge

Declaration Owner

JBT Corporation

3100 Pennsylvania Ave

Ogden Utah 84401

https://www.jbtc.com

801.629.3408

Product

The Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge

Declared Unit

The declared unit is one linear meter of passenger boarding bridge

Geographic Region

North America

EPD Number and Period of Validity

SCS-EPD-05609

EPD Valid July 15, 2019 through July 14, 2024

Product Category Rule

Product Category Rule for Construction Products and Construction

Services. Product Group Classification: Multiple UN CPC Codes.

International EPD® System. 2012:01. Version 2.3. November 2018.

Addendum for Adapting the International EPD System PCR for use in

North America. Construction Products and Construction Services

Product Group Classification: Multiple UN CPC Codes. SCS Global

Services. V1.0. September 27, 2017. Valid Until September 26, 2020.

Program Operator

SCS Global Services

2000 Powell Street, Ste. 600, Emeryville, CA 94608

+1.510.452.8000 | www.SCSglobalServices.com


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

1

© 2019 SCSglobalServices.com

Declaration Owner: JBT Corporation

Address: 3100 Pennsylvania Ave, Ogden, Utah 84401

Declaration Number: SCS-EPD-05609

Declaration Validity Period: July 15, 2019 through July 14, 2024

Program Operator: SCS Global Services

Declaration URL Link: https://www.scsglobalservices.com/certified-green-products-guide

LCA Practitioner: Jeremie Hakian

LCA Software: openLCA 1.7.4

Independent critical review of

the LCA and data, according

to ISO 14044 and ISO 14071

internal ☐ external

LCA Reviewer:

Gerard Mansell, Ph.D., SCS Global Services

Product Category Rule:

Product Category Rule for Construction Products and Construction Services. Product Group

Classification: Multiple UN CPC Codes. International EPD® System. 2012:01. Version 2.3. November

2018.

PCR Review conducted by: Technical Committee of the International EPD® System

Independent verification of

the declaration and data,

according to ISO 14025 and the

PCR

☐ internal external

PCR Addendum:

Addendum for Adapting the International EPD System PCR for use in North America. Construction

Products and Construction Services Product Group Classification: Multiple UN CPC Codes. SCS

Global Services. V1.0. September 27, 2017. Valid Until September 26, 2020.

PCR Addendum Reviewed

by: Thomas Gloria, Ph.D., Industrial Ecology Consultants

EPD Verifier:

Tom Gloria, Ph.D., Industrial Ecology Consultants

Declaration Contents:

1. About JBT………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....2

2. Product………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…2

3. LCA: Calculation Rules…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…4

4. LCA: Results……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10

6. LCA: Interpretation…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13

References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…14

Disclaimers: This EPD conforms to ISO 14025, 14040, 14044, and ISO 21930.

Scope of Results Reported: The PCR requirements limit the scope of the LCA metrics such that the results exclude environmental and

social performance benchmarks and thresholds, and exclude impacts from the depletion of natural resources, land use ecological

impacts, ocean impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions, risks from hazardous wastes and impacts linked to hazardous chemical

emissions.

Accuracy of Results: Due to PCR constraints, this EPD provides estimations of potential impacts that are inherently limited in terms of

accuracy.

Comparability: The PCR this EPD was based on was not written to support comparative assertions. EPDs based on different PCRs, or

different calculation models, may not be comparable. When attempting to compare EPDs or life cycle impacts of products from different

companies, the user should be aware of the uncertainty in the final results, due to and not limited to, the practitioner’s assumptions, the

source of the data used in the study, and the specifics of the product modeled.

In accordance with ISO 21930:2017, EPDs are comparable only if they comply with the core PCR, use the same sub-category PCR where

applicable, include all relevant information modules and are based on equivalent scenarios with respect to the context of construction

works.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2


1. About JBT

John Bean Technologies Corporation (JBT) is a leading global technology solutions provider to high-value segments of the

food processing and air transportation industries. We design, manufacture, test and service technologically sophisticated

systems and products for our customers.

2. Product

2.1 Product Description

The Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridges are at the heart of every successful aircraft boarding experience. The passenger

boarding bridge is the entity that spans the gap between terra firma and travel amidst the clouds. Built for longevity,

reliability, and air traveler experience, the innovative bridge provides operator assisted docking for smoother, and more

efficient boarding procedures. Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC) improve diagnostic and monitoring capabilities taking

the mystery out of operational readiness. Unique designs and control features allow for increased operational flexibility

with changing aircraft and terminal configurations.

The product under scope is the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge with an operational length of 125 ft (38.1 m)

assembled in Ogden, Utah. The product is composed of a multitude of steel, aluminum, wood, and bronze components.

This product is classified under the UNCPC code 5322.

2.2 Application

The product is intended for use in commercial applications only.

2.3 Technical Data

Product specifications and performance results of the testing standards for the products assessed are summarized in

Table 2. The Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridges are Electrical Testing Laboratories (ETL) listed and Canadian Standards

Association (CSA) approved. Furthermore, the structural integrity of the Jetway meets the performance standards

established by the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) and American Welding Society (AWS). Code compliance

for the Jetway include the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME),

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other

Structures (ASCE 7), National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), and National Electric Code (NEC). The material

test standards for the Jetway are included in the table below.

Table 2. Material Test Standards for the Jetway.

Material Test Standard

Structural Plate ASTM-A36

Structural Steel and Shapes ASTM-A36 or ASTM-A572

Hinge Pings AISC-C1018

Steel Tube ASTM-A500 Grade B

Bolts-Standard ASTM-A307

Steel Pipe ASTM-A53 Grade B

Bolts-High Strength ASTM-A325 and ASTM-A490

Steel Sheet ASTM-A570

T-1 Steel ASTM-A514


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3


2.4 Delivery Status

The final product is packaged with wood crates, composite wood panels, wood blocks, and corrugated board boxes.

Although packaging is included in the EPD, the delivery of the product for use is outside the scope of this EPD.

2.5 Base Materials

The material composition and recycled content of the components used for the assembly of the Jetway® Passenger

Boarding Bridge represented in this EPD are shown below. Values are rounded to three significant figures.

Table 3. Material content of 1 linear meter of the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge, including pre- and post-consumer material content.

Material Amount

(kg/m) Percent of Total

Pre-Consumer

(%)

Post-Consumer

(%)

Steel 693 88.7% 23.5% 46.9%

Wood 77.5 9.92% 0.00% 0.00%

Aluminum 10.6 1.35% 25.0% 60.0%

Bronze 2.03x10-2 0.00259% 0.00% 0.00%

TOTAL 781 100% 21.2% 42.4%

2.6 Manufacture

The Jetway is manufactured at the Ogden, Utah facility using material components from multiple suppliers, with steel

composing most of the product’s mass (approximately 89% of total mass). Manufacturing and assembly of the Jetway is

done in an assembly line style process. Certified welders assemble a combination of structural frames and corrugated

panels to create the bridge’s tunnel sections. The structural frame of the bridge takes approximately four days to

assemble. The tunnel sections then pass through a media blast booth and a paint booth. Each bridge receives a three-part

epoxy paint coating of the clients chosen color. Following the painting process, the operator console and cab are installed.

Bridge function and configuration are fully customizable to the client’s needs. High impact wallboard, interior lighting, and

commercial flooring treatments complete the interior of the bridges, albeit out of scope of this LCA. The process takes

approximately ten working days from start to finish. Each bridge is mounted to a test stand where functionality is tested

and confirmed, and a team of inspectors verifies compliance to the client specification. Bridges are then shipped via two

tractor-trailer rigs for on-road transport. Fully collapsed, the Jetway will travel as permitted loads on ships and trucks to all

parts of the globe.

2.7 Product Processing/ Installation

Installation of the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge requires use of cranes, scissor forklifts, and manual labor. Additional

electric wiring and assembly of hydraulic elements are required. The final installed product is subject to a site acceptance

test to ensure it meets all specifications and safety requirements. Depending on the location of installation, gates may

need to be rebuilt or modified to accommodate passenger boarding areas. The installation of the Jetway® Passenger

Boarding Bridge is outside the scope of this EPD.

2.8 Packaging

The amount of packaging used for the final products in this EPD, and their pre- and post-consumer material content, are

provided below. Values are rounded to three significant figures.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4


Table 4. Material composition of packaging for 1 linear meter the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge, including pre- and post-consumer

material content.

Material Component Amount

(kg/m) Percent of Total Pre-Consumer

(%)

Post-Consumer

(%)

Pallet 30.8 53.3% 0.00% 0.00%

Wood 20.1 34.8% 0.00% 0.00%

Corrugated Board 6.93 12.0% 0.00% 0.00%

TOTAL 57.9 100% 0.00% 0.00%

2.9 Condition of Use

No special conditions of use are noted.

2.10 Environment and Health during use

No environmental or health impacts are expected due to normal use of the product.

2.11 Extraordinary Effects

No environmental or health impacts are expected due to extraordinary effects including fire and/or water damage and

product destruction.

2.12 Re-Use Phase

The Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge is not typically reused at end-of-life.

2.13 Disposal

At end-of-life, the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge material components may be disposed of in a landfill, incinerated, or

recycled.

European Waste Code: 17 (Construction and Demolition Wastes)

2.14 Further Information

Further information on the product can be found on the manufacturers’ website: https://www.jbtc.com/aerotech

3. LCA: Calculation Rules

3.1 Functional Unit

The declared unit used in the study, as specified in the PCR, is one linear meter of passenger boarding bridge. The

reference flow used for the LCA is one linear meter.

3.2 System Boundary

The scope of the EPD is cradle-to-gate, including raw material extraction and processing, transportation, product

manufacture, and product packaging. The life cycle phases included in each product system boundary are shown below.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5


Figure 1. Product system for the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

6


3.3 Estimates and Assumptions

The Ogden, Utah facility is located in the NWPP eGRID EPA NERC subregion. An Ecoinvent inventory dataset was

modified to reflect the eGRID electricity supply mix to estimate resource use and emissions from electricity use at

the manufacturing facility.

Electricity and resource use (natural gas and water) at the Ogden, Utah facility were allocated to the product

based on product mass, utilizing production data for calendar year 2017 provided by the manufacturer.

No pig iron material input flow is used in the default Ecoinvent electric arc furnace (EAF) dataset. Based on a LEED

documentation memo provided by the manufacturer, the EAF process utilized a 93.3% scrap content. As such, a

pig iron input flow was added to account for the remaining non-scrap content.

Post-consumer and pre-consumer scrap in Ecoinvent are not able to be discerned and therefore unable to be

modified. The iron scrap Ecoinvent dataset used includes collecting of new and old iron scrap, transport to scrap-

yard, sorting, and pressing into blocks.

For steel components, a representative mix of electric arc furnace and basic oxygen furnace steelmaking is

assumed based on 2017 data for the United States from Worldsteel.

The recycled content of aluminum components was based on a LEED documentation memo provided by the

manufacturer.

All material losses to produce material components are based on Ecoinvent default parameters.

Representative inventory data for the extraction and production of raw materials are modeled with unit process

data taken from the Ecoinvent life cycle database to the extent that they were applicable, with some components

requiring proxy datasets.

It should also be noted that LCIA results are relative expressions and do not predict impacts on category endpoints, the

exceeding of thresholds, safety margins or risks.

The PCR allows for the results for several inventory flows related to construction products to be reported as “other

parameters”. These are aggregated inventory flows, and do not characterize any potential impact; results should be

interpreted taking into account this limitation.

3.4 Cut-off criteria

According to the PCR, processes contributing greater than 1% of the total environmental impact indicator for each impact

are included in the inventory. In total, these missing data represent 5% of the mass or energy flows. No data gaps

were allowed which were expected to significantly affect the outcome of the indicator results.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

7

3.5 Background Data

Primary data were provided by JBT for their manufacturing plant, product material composition, and packaging. The

sources of secondary LCI data are the Ecoinvent v3.4 database.

Table 5. LCI datasets and associated databases used to model the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge.

Flow Dataset Data Source Database Year

Product Materials

Alloy Steel

Components

market for sheet rolling, chromium steel | sheet rolling, chromium steel |

Cutoff, U – GLO; market for section bar rolling, steel | section bar rolling,

steel | Cutoff, U – GLO; market for drawing of pipe, steel | drawing of

pipe, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel production, electric, chromium steel

18/8 | steel, chromium steel 18/8 | Cutoff, U (93.3% scrap) – US; steel

production, converter, chromium steel 18/8 | steel, chromium steel 18/8

| Cutoff, U (32.7% scrap) - US

Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Carbon Steel

Components

market for hot rolling, steel | hot rolling, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel

production, converter, low-alloyed | steel, low-alloyed | Cutoff, U (32.7%

scrap) – US; steel production, electric, low-alloyed | steel, low-alloyed |

Cutoff, U (93.3% scrap) - US

Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Carbon Low Alloy

Steel Components

market for hot rolling, steel | hot rolling, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel

production, converter, low-alloyed | steel, low-alloyed | Cutoff, U (32.7%

scrap) – US; steel production, electric, low-alloyed | steel, low-alloyed |


Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Carbon Steel

Components

market for drawing of pipe, steel | drawing of pipe, steel | Cutoff, U –

GLO; market for hot rolling, steel | hot rolling, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO;

market for metal working, average for steel product manufacturing |

metal working, average for steel product manufacturing | Cutoff, U –

GLO; market for section bar rolling, steel | section bar rolling, steel |

Cutoff, U – GLO; welding, arc, steel | welding, arc, steel | Cutoff, U – RER;

market for zinc coat, pieces | zinc coat, pieces | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel

production, converter, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed | Cutoff, U (32.7%

scrap) – US; steel production, electric, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed |


Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Low Alloy Steel

Components



market for sheet rolling, steel | sheet rolling, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO;

market for zinc coat, coils | zinc coat, coils | Cutoff, U – GLO; market for

zinc coat, pieces | zinc coat, pieces | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel production,

converter, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed | Cutoff, U (32.7% scrap) – US;

steel production, electric, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed | Cutoff, U (93.3%

scrap) - US

Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Low Carbon Steel

Components



market for powder coat, steel | powder coat, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO;

market for section bar rolling, steel | section bar rolling, steel | Cutoff, U

– GLO; market for sheet rolling, steel | sheet rolling, steel | Cutoff, U –

GLO; market for zinc coat, coils | zinc coat, coils | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel

production, converter, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed | Cutoff, U (32.7%

scrap) – US; steel production, electric, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed |


Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Medium Carbon Steel

Components




– GLO; market for sheet rolling, steel | sheet rolling, steel | Cutoff, U –

GLO; market for zinc coat, pieces | zinc coat, pieces | Cutoff, U – GLO;

steel production, converter, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed | Cutoff, U

(32.7% scrap) – US; steel production, electric, unalloyed | steel, unalloyed

| Cutoff, U (93.3% scrap) - US

Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Stainless Steel

Components




Ecoinvent 3.4 2017


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8


Flow Dataset Data Source Database Year

– GLO; market for sheet rolling, chromium steel | sheet rolling,

chromium steel | Cutoff, U – GLO; market for welding, arc, steel |

welding, arc, steel | Cutoff, U – GLO; steel production, electric, chromium

steel 18/8 | steel, chromium steel 18/8 | Cutoff, U (93.3% scrap) – US;

steel production, converter, chromium steel 18/8 | steel, chromium steel

18/8 | Cutoff, U (32.7% scrap) - US

Aluminum

Components

aluminium production, primary, ingot | aluminium, primary, ingot |

Cutoff, U (85% scrap) – US; market for laser machining, metal, with YAG-

laser, 500W power | laser machining, metal, with YAG-laser, 500W power

| Cutoff, U – GLO; market for section bar extrusion, aluminium | section

bar extrusion, aluminium | Cutoff, U – GLO; market for sheet rolling,

aluminium | sheet rolling, aluminium | Cutoff, U - GLO

Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Bronze Components market for bronze | bronze | Cutoff, U – GLO; market for casting, bronze

| casting, bronze | Cutoff, U - GLO Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Wood Components market for plywood, for outdoor use | plywood, for outdoor use | Cutoff,

U - RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Packaging

Corrugated Board corrugated board box production | corrugated board box | Cutoff, U -

RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Wooden Pallet EUR-flat pallet production | EUR-flat pallet | Cutoff, U - RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Wood board, softwood, raw, air drying to u=20% | sawnwood, board, softwood,

raw, dried (u=20%) | Cutoff, U - RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Electricity/Heat/Resources for Manufacturing

Electricity Electricity, medium voltage, at grid/NWPP 2016 U Ecoinvent 3.4;

eGRID2016 2017; 2018

Natural Gas market for heat, district or industrial, natural gas | heat, district or

industrial, natural gas | Cutoff, U - RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Propane market for propane, burned in building machine | propane, burned in

building machine | Cutoff, U - GLO Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Water market for tap water | tap water | Cutoff, U - RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Transportation

Road market for transport, freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | transport,

freight, lorry 16-32 metric ton, EURO4 | Cutoff, U - GLO Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Ship market for transport, freight, sea, transoceanic ship | transport, freight,

sea, transoceanic ship | Cutoff, U - GLO Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

Train market for transport, freight train | transport, freight train | Cutoff, U -

RoW Ecoinvent 3.4 2017

3.6 Data Quality

The data quality assessment addressed the following parameters: time-related coverage, geographical coverage,

technological coverage, precision, completeness, representativeness, consistency, reproducibility, sources of data, and

uncertainty.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

9

Table 6. Data quality assessment for the EPD.

Data Quality Parameter Data Quality Discussion

Time-Related Coverage:

Age of data and the minimum length

of time over which data is collected

The most recent available data are used, based on other considerations such as data quality

and similarity to the actual operations. All of the data used represented an average of at least

one year’s worth of data collection, and up to three years in some cases. Manufacturer-supplied

data (primary data) are based on annual production for 2017.

Geographical Coverage:

Geographical area from which data

for unit processes is collected to

satisfy the goal of the study

The data used in the analysis provide the best possible representation available with current

data. Actual processes for upstream operations are primarily North American. Surrogate data

used in the assessment are representative of North American or European operations. Data

representative of European operations are considered sufficiently similar to actual processes.

Technology Coverage:

Specific technology or technology mix

For the most part, data are representative of the actual technologies used for processing,

transportation, and manufacturing operations. Representative material datasets are used to

represent the actual processes where needed.

Precision:

Measure of the variability of the data

values for each data expressed

Precision of results are not quantified due to a lack of data. Data collected for operations were

typically averaged for one or more years and over multiple operations, which is expected to

reduce the variability of results.

Completeness:

Percentage of flow that is measured

or estimated

The LCA model included all known mass and energy flows for production of product. However,

the manufacturer could only provide 95% of the product mass in material components. In some

instances, surrogate data used to represent upstream and downstream operations may be

missing some data which is propagated in the model. No known processes or activities

contributing to more than 1% of the total environmental impact for each indicator are excluded.

In total, these missing data represent 5% of the mass or energy flows.

Representativeness:

Qualitative assessment of the degree

to which the data set reflects the true

population of interest

Data used in the assessment represent typical or average processes as currently reported from

multiple data sources and are therefore generally representative of the range of actual

processes and technologies for production of these materials. Considerable deviation may

exist among actual processes on a site-specific basis; however, such a determination would

require detailed data collection throughout the supply chain back to resource extraction.

Consistency:

Qualitative assessment of whether

the study methodology is applied

uniformly to the various components

of the analysis

The consistency of the assessment is considered to be high. Data sources of similar quality and

age are used taken from Ecoinvent v3.4. Different portions of the product life cycle are equally

considered.

Reproducibility:

Qualitative assessment of the extent

to which information about the

methodology and data values would

allow an independent practitioner to

reproduce the results reported in the

study

Based on the description of data and assumptions used, this assessment would be

reproducible by other practitioners. All assumptions and data sources are documented.

Sources of the Data:

Description of all primary and

secondary data sources

Data representing energy use at the manufacturing facility represent an annual average and are

considered of high quality due to the length of time over which these data are collected, as

compared to a snapshot that may not accurately reflect fluctuations in production. The

Ecoinvent v3.4 database is used for secondary LCI datasets.

Uncertainty of the Information:

Uncertainty related to data, models,

and assumptions

Uncertainty related to materials in the product and packaging is sufficiently low. Actual supplier

data for upstream operations was not available for suppliers and the study relied upon the use

of existing representative datasets. These datasets contained relatively recent data (<10 years)

but lacked geographical representativeness. Uncertainty related to the impact assessment

methods used in the study are high. The impact assessment method required by the PCR

includes impact potentials, which lack characterization of providing and receiving environments

or tipping points.

3.7 Period under review

The period of review is calendar year 2017.


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

10


3.8 Allocation

This study follows the allocation guidelines of ISO 14044, and sought to minimize the use of allocation wherever possible.

According to the PCR, allocation procedures should be based on physical relationships (e.g., volume, energy content, or

mass-based relationships).

For the raw material supply (A1) and all secondary datasets used for this LCA study, processes were modelled using the

cut-off system model of Ecoinvent v3.4 database.

For the transport stage (A2), impacts were allocated based on the mass of materials and distance transported from first

tier suppliers to the facility.

For the manufacturing stage (A3), annual facility-level electricity, natural gas, and water use data were provided by the

manufacturer for calendar year 2017 for the Ogden, Utah plant. Resource use and emissions were allocated to the

product based on the mass of the product as a fraction of the total plant production of all products produced at the plant.

3.9 Comparability

The Product Category Rule (PCR) this EPD was based on was not written to support comparative assertions. EPDs based on

different PCRs, or different calculation models, may not be comparable. When attempting to compare EPDs or life cycle

impacts of products from different companies, the user should be aware of the uncertainty in the final results, due to and

not limited to, the practitioner’s assumptions, the source of the data used in the study, and the specifics of the product

modeled.

4. LCA: Results

Table 7. Life cycle phases included in the product system boundary.

Product Construction

Process Use End-of-life

Benefits

& loads

beyond

the

system

boundary

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 B1 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 C1 C2 C3 C4 D

Ra

w m

ate

ria

l ext

ract

ion

an

d p

roce

ssin

g

Tra

nsp

ort

to

ma

nu

fact

ure

r

Ma

nu

fact

uri

ng

Tra

nsp

ort

Co

nst

ruct

ion

-

inst

alla

tio

n

Use

Ma

inte

na

nce

Re

pa

ir

Re

pla

cem

en

t

Re

furb

ish

me

nt

Op

era

tio

na

l en

erg

y u

se

Op

era

tio

na

l wa

ter

use

De

con

stru

ctio

n

de

mo

litio

n

Tra

nsp

ort

Wa

ste

pro

cess

ing

Dis

po

sal

Re

use

, re

cove

ry a

nd

/or

recy

clin

g p

ote

nti

al

X X X MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND MND

X = Module included | MND = Module not declared


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11

Table 8. CML Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) results for 1 linear m of the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge. All values are rounded to

two significant digits.

Impact category Unit Module A1 Module A2 Module A3

Total Sourcing/Extraction Transport Manufacturing

Global Warming Potential (GWP-

100) kg CO2 eq

1.3x103 76 150 1.5x103

85% 5.0% 10% 100%

Acidification Potential kg SO2 eq 6.5 0.31 0.43 7.2

90% 4.2% 6.0% 100%

Eutrophication Potential kg PO43- eq

2.9 7.2x10-2 0.28 3.2

89% 2.2% 8.6% 100%

Photochemical Ozone Creation

Potential kg C2H4 eq

0.62 1.3x10-2 1.7x10-2 0.65

95% 2.0% 2.6% 100%

Ozone Depletion Potential kg CFC-11 eq 8.1x10-5 1.4x10-5 8.1x10-6 1.0x10-4

79% 13% 7.9% 100%

Abiotic Resource Depletion

(Elements)* kg Sb eq

3.0x10-2 2.3x10-4 1.3x10-4 3.0x10-2

99% 0.75% 0.44% 100%

Abiotic Resource Depletion (Fossil) MJ eq 1.4x104 1.1x103 2.0x103 1.7x104

82% 6.7% 12% 100%

*This indicator is based on assumptions regarding current reserves estimates. Users should use caution when interpreting results because there is

insufficient information on which indicator is best for assessing the depletion of abiotic resources

Table 9. TRACI Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) results for 1 linear m of the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge. All values are rounded

to two significant digits.

Impact category Unit Module A1 Module A2 Module A3

Total Sourcing/Extraction Transport Manufacturing

Global Warming Potential

(GWP-100) kg CO2 eq

1.4x103 77 1.6x102 1.6x103

86% 4.7% 10% 100%

Acidification Potential kg SO2 eq 6.8 0.35 0.50 7.7

89% 4.6% 6.5% 100%

Eutrophication Potential kg N eq 5.6 9.1x10-2 0.54 6.2

90% 1.5% 8.7% 100%

Photochemical Ozone Creation

Potential kg O3 eq

71 8.2 7.5 86

82% 10% 8.7% 100%

Ozone Depletion Potential kg CFC-11 eq 9.9x10-5 1.8x10-5 1.2x10-5 1.3x10-4

76% 14% 9.3% 100%


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

12


Table 10. Resource use results for 1 linear m of the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge. All values are rounded to two significant digits.

Parameter Unit

Module A1 Module A2 Module A3

Total Sourcing/

Extraction Transport Manufacturing

Use of renewable primary energy excluding the renewable

primary energy resources used as raw materials [PERE] MJ INA INA INA INA

Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw

materials [PERM] MJ INA INA INA INA

Total use of renewable primary energy resources [PERT] MJ 4.4x103 17 3.2x103 7.6x103

58% 0.23% 42% 100%

Use of non-renewable primary energy excluding non-

renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials

[PENRE]

MJ INA INA INA INA

Use of non-renewable primary energy resources used as

raw materials [PENRM] MJ INA INA INA INA

Total use of non-renewable primary energy resources

[PENRT] MJ

1.3x104 1.1x103 1.7x103 1.6x104

82% 7.0% 11% 100%

Use of secondary materials [SM] kg 520 0.0 0.0 520

100% 0.0% 0.0% 100%

Use of renewable secondary fuels [RSF] MJ INA INA INA INA

Use of non-renewable secondary fuels [NRSF] MJ INA INA INA INA

Net use of fresh water resources [FW] m3 75 0.85 8.5 84

89% 1.0% 10% 100%

Use of renewable material resource kg 78 0.0 0.0 78

100% 0.0% 0.0% 100%

INA = Indicator Not Assessed

Table 11. Waste and outflow results for 1 linear m of the Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge. All values are rounded to two significant

digits.

Parameter Unit

Module A1 Module A2 Module A3

Total Sourcing/

Extraction Transport Manufacturing

Hazardous waste disposed [HWD] kg 4.4 7.5x10-4 0.12 4.5

97% 0.017% 2.7% 100%

Non-hazardous waste disposed [NHWD] kg 4.3x102 54 12 5.0x102

87% 11% 2.4% 100%

Radioactive waste disposed [RWD] kg 4.2x10-2 7.7x10-3 4.6x10-3 5.4x10-2

77% 14% 8.4% 100%

Components for re-use [CRU] kg 0 0 0 0

Materials for recycling [MFR] kg Neg Neg 7.1x102 7.1x102

0.0% 0.0% 100% 100%

Materials for energy recovery [MER] kg INA INA INA INA

Exported energy [EEE] MJ INA INA INA INA

Use of renewable material resources [RMR] kg 77 Neg 58 135

57% 0.0% 43% 100%

INA = Indicator Not Assessed

Neg = Negligible


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

13

6. LCA: Interpretation

The interpretation phase conforms to ISO 14044 with further guidance from the ILCD General Guide for Life Cycle

Assessment. The interpretation included the use of evaluation and sensitivity checks to steer the iterative process during

the assessment, and a final evaluation including completeness, sensitivity, and consistency checks, at the end of the study.

In general, the raw material extraction and processing phase (A1) is the largest contributor to the cradle-to-gate impacts,

followed by product manufacturing (A3), and transport (A2). More specifically, the contribution to impacts from the

production of steel components is the largest (primarily from carbon steel components and low carbon steel components).

The second largest contribution to environmental impacts is from manufacturing (primarily from electricity use). Ultimately,

the transport of materials from first tier supplier to the manufacturing facility over the life cycle of the product is relatively

small (up to 13% contribution).


………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

14


References

1. Addendum for Adapting the International EPD System PCR for use in North America. Construction Products and

Construction Services Product Group Classification: Multiple UN CPC Codes. SCS Global Services. V1.0.

September 27, 2017. Valid Until September 26, 2020.

2. CML-IA Characterization Factors. Leiden University, Institute of Environmental Sciences. April 2013.

http://cml.leiden.edu/software/data-cmlia.html

3. EN 15804:2012+A1:2013. Sustainability of construction works – Environmental product declarations – Core

rules for the product category of construction products. 2013.

4. ISO 14025:2006 Environmental labels and declarations – Type III environmental declarations – Principles and

Procedures.

5. ISO 14040: 2006 Environmental Management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and Framework

6. ISO 14044: 2006 Environmental Management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and Guidelines.

7. Life Cycle Assessment of The Jetway® Passenger Boarding Bridge. SCS Global Services Report. Prepared for JBT

Corporation. May 2019.

8. Product Category Rule for Construction Products and Construction Services. Product Group Classification:

Multiple UN CPC Codes. International EPD® System. 2012:01. Version 2.3. November 2018.

9. SCS Type III Environmental Declaration Program: Program Operator Manual. V10 April 2019. SCS Global

Services.

10. Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI). Dr. Bare, J.,

http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/traci/traci.html

11. US EPA. Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2014 Fact Sheet. Assessing Trends in Material

Generation, Recycling and Disposal in the United States. November 2015.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/documents/2014_smmfactsheet_508.pdf.

12. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Commerce,

Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau (2015). United States: 2012. Table 11, NAICS Code

326. Issued February 2015.

https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/econ/ec12tcf-us.pdf

13. "WARM Model Transportation Research - Draft." Memorandum from ICF Consulting to United States

Environmental Protection Agency. September 7, 2004.

14. Wernet, G., Bauer, C., Steubing, B., Reinhard, J., Moreno-Ruiz, E., and Weidema, B., 2016. The ecoinvent database

version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, [online] 21(9),

pp.1218–1230. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8

15. World Steel Association. World Steel in Figures 2018. https://www.worldsteel.org/en/dam/jcr:f9359dff-9546-

4d6b-bed0-996201185b12/World+Steel+in+Figures+2018.pdf


For more information, contact:

JBT Corporation

3100 Pennsylvania Ave

Ogden Utah 84401

https://www.jbtc.com | 801.629.3408

SCS Global Services

2000 Powell Street, Ste. 600, Emeryville, CA 94608 USA

Main +1.510.452.8000 | fax +1.510.452.8001

https://www.jbtc.com/

Documents

Environmental Product Declaration The Jetway Passenger ... › products › cert_pdfs › ... · 2000 Powell Street, Ste. 600, Emeryville, CA 94608 +1.510.452.8000 | ... Following