Close Go back Collapse all sections
Process Data set: A1 Fastbase (en) en

Key Data Set Information
Location GB
Geographical representativeness description United Kingdom
Reference year 2025
Name
A1 Fastbase
Use advice for data set This LCA covers the Product (A1, A2 and A3), Use (B1), End of Life (C1 to C4) and Benefits/loads beyond the system boundary (D) Stages, as indicated above. This is termed: "Cradle to gate with options, modules C1 to C4, and module D". A schematic of these stages is covered in the flow diagram illustration below.
Technical purpose of product or process Reinforced concrete communications chamber. The mass of the Fastbase unit is 8.786 tonnes. The concrete comprises specialised cements, aggregates and water. Reinforcing steel has a recycled content of 100% recycled steel. Fastbase unit complies with I.S. EN 13369 Common rules for precast concrete. products. Concrete complies with I.S. EN 206 :2013 -Concrete Specification, Performance, Production and Conformity.
General comment on data set Data quality: Time Representativeness: In this LCA the data relating to the usages, emissions and materials, and the data relating to the bespoke background processes for environmental impacts are less than 2 years apart, and also the Ecoinvent database version 3.9.1.. Time Representativeness is considered to be Very good. Geographical Representativeness: The processes used in the production of the concrete products are geographically representative, insofar as the production location (England) lies within the region for which the relevant Ecoinvent (version 3.9.1) environmental records have been selected. The dataset is up-to-date and representative for the current technology used in the processes of manufacturing the products. Geographical Representativeness is considered to be Very good. Technical Representativeness: Processes and energies used in the process have been modelled exactly as described by Banagher Precast, and are based directly on the production data supplied by Banagher Precast, in relation to raw materials, processes, fuels used and emissions, and without any significant need for improvement. Technical Representativeness is considered to be Very good. Allocation: The measurement of environmental impacts in this EPD uses the LCIA methodologies recommended for PEF 3.1. In this EPD, the waste processes are allocated in the relevant module. In the case of the use of secondary materials or energy recovered from secondary fuels, the system boundary between the system under study and the previous system (providing the secondary materials) is set where outputs of the previous system, e.g. materials, products, building elements or energy, reach the end-of-waste state. The modularity and the polluter payer principles have been followed. Cut-off criteria: All relevant inputs and outputs - like emissions, energy and materials - have been taken into account in this LCA, and in accordance with EN15804+A2:2019. The study covers at least 95% of the materials and energy per module and at least 99% of the total use of materials and energy of each unit process. Long term emissions have been excluded from the study.
Copyright Yes
Owner of data set
Quantitative reference
Reference flow(s)
Biogenic carbon content
  • Carbon content (biogenic): 0.0 kg
  • Carbon content (biogenic) - packaging: 0.0 kg
Time representativeness
Data set valid until 2030
Time representativeness description "2025-08-28" - "2030-08-27"
Technological representativeness
Technology description including background system Mean density of concrete: 2,400 kg/m3

Indicators of life cycle

IndicatorDirectionUnit Use
B1
 Operational energy use
B6
 Operational water use
B7
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Use of renewable primary energy (PERE)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 6.069
  • 18.23
  • 2.523
  • 0
  • -29.26
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PERM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of renewable primary energy resource (PERT)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 6.069
  • 18.23
  • 2.523
  • 0
  • -29.26
Use of non renewable primary energy (PENRE)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1134
  • 1233
  • 471.4
  • 0
  • -481.9
Use of non renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials (PENRM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Total use of non renewable primary energy resource (PENRT)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1134
  • 1233
  • 471.4
  • 0
  • -481.9
Use of secondary material (SM)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of renewable secondary fuels (RSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of non renewable secondary fuels (NRSF)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Use of net fresh water (FW)
Input
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.07498
  • 0.1557
  • 0.03117
  • 0
  • -0.9795
Hazardous waste disposed (HWD)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.007179
  • 0.007379
  • 0.002984
  • 0
  • -0.002679
Non hazardous waste dispose (NHWD)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1.526
  • 57.62
  • 0.6343
  • 0
  • -2.462
Radioactive waste disposed (RWD)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.0001169
  • 0.0003813
  • 0.00004857
  • 0
  • -0.0001817
Components for re-use (CRU)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for recycling (MFR)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 5928
  • 0
  • 0
Materials for energy recovery (MER)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Exported electrical energy (EEE)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Exported thermal energy (EET)
Output
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

IndicatorUnit Use
B1
 Operational energy use
B6
 Operational water use
B7
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
Abiotic depletion potential - fossil resources (ADPF)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1067
  • 1.16E+3
  • 443.4
  • 0
  • -452.9
Abiotic depletion potential - non-fossil resources (ADPE)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.00002843
  • 0.000267
  • 0.00001182
  • 0
  • -0.00008864
Acidification potential, Accumulated Exceedance (AP)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.7549
  • 0.1785
  • 0.3138
  • 0
  • -0.7113
Depletion potential of the stratospheric ozone layer (ODP)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.000001295
  • 0.000001778
  • 5.385E-7
  • 0
  • -4.958E-7
Eutrophication potential - freshwater (EP-freshwater)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.0002941
  • 0.0006634
  • 0.0001223
  • 0
  • -0.0005685
Eutrophication potential - marine (EP-marine)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.3495
  • 0.04395
  • 0.1453
  • 0
  • -0.2485
Eutrophication potential - terrestrial (EP-terrestrial)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 3.804
  • 0.4576
  • 1.581
  • 0
  • -3.456
Global Warming Potential - biogenic (GWP-biogenic)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.01869
  • 0.07482
  • 0.007768
  • 0
  • 0.04222
Global Warming Potential - fossil fuels (GWP-fossil)
  • -80.3
  • 0
  • 0
  • 81.45
  • 81.66
  • 33.86
  • 0
  • -37.42
Global Warming Potential - land use and land use change (GWP-luluc)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.009166
  • 0.04032
  • 0.00381
  • 0
  • -0.01691
Global Warming Potential - total (GWP-total)
  • -80.3
  • 0
  • 0
  • 81.47
  • 81.78
  • 33.87
  • 0
  • -37.39
Global warming potential except emissions and uptake of biogenic carbon (GWP-IOBC/GHG)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential (POCP)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1.126
  • 0.2771
  • 0.4683
  • 0
  • -0.7775
Water (user) deprivation potential (WDP)
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 2.311
  • 4.802
  • 0.9607
  • 0
  • -40.47

IndicatorUnit Use
B1
 Operational energy use
B6
 Operational water use
B7
 De-construction
C1
 Transport
C2
 Waste processing
C3
 Disposal
C4
 Recycling Potential
D
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 ecosystems (ETP-fw) 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 509.8
  • 573.5
  • 211.9
  • 0
  • -5.1E+2
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - cancer effects (HTP-c) 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 2.494E-8
  • 3.723E-8
  • 1.037E-8
  • 0
  • -1.856E-8
Potential Comparative Toxic Unit for humans - non-cancer effects (HTP-nc) 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1.734E-7
  • 8.231E-7
  • 7.207E-8
  • 0
  • -2.234E-7
Potential Human exposure efficiency relative to U235 (IRP) 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.2181
  • 0.5878
  • 0.09065
  • 0
  • -0.2962
Potential Soil quality index (SQP) 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 71.85
  • 701.2
  • 29.87
  • 0
  • -1349
Potential incidence of disease due to PM emissions (PM) 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0.00002104
  • 0.00000606
  • 0.00005283
  • 0
  • -0.00001099