The Role of EPDs in Addressing Embodied Carbon in Buildings | Kingspan CA

Products: Rigid Insulation; Moisture Barrier

Follow Us: Instagram; Linkedin

Resources: Document Library; About Us

Legal Notice: Cookie Policy & Control; Terms & Conditions of Website Use; Website Privacy Policy

© 2026 Kingspan Holdings (IRL) Limited, All Rights Reserved

The Role of EPDs in Addressing Embodied Carbon in Buildings

Background

Buildings are currently responsible for 39% of global energy related carbon emissions: 28% from operational emissions, from energy needed to heat, cool and power them, and the remaining 11% from materials and construction[1]. As building regulations improve to drive more energy-efficiency in buildings and as more of the world’s energy sources move over to renewable energy, the carbon from emissions linked to the operational phase of buildings will decrease and the carbon linked to the materials and construction will become the major part of the building’s footprint. Actions are therefore needed to ensure there is a drive to reduce carbon at all stages of a building’s life cycle.

How to reduce embodied carbon

First, it is imperative to fully assess the carbon footprint of a building throughout its life cycle. This means conducting a whole life carbon assessment at the building level. The building level assessment should include materials, construction, transport of materials, operational impact and end-of life considerations.

Based on a full assessment, it is possible to plan to reduce a building’s carbon footprint[2]. Kingspan believes that it is important to create the right policy framework that addresses the embodied carbon of materials used to create a building without having a negative consequence on the building’s in-use carbon impact and, as a consequence, its whole life carbon footprint.

To enable such assessments, manufacturers should publish independent 3rd party verified Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) on their products. Such EPDs contain a metric for embodied carbon, amongst other impacts, and also consider end of life of the materials. The assessment should be done by trained experts using a common approach. The starting point for such an approach is already available, and in use, in the form of the suite of standards created by CEN/TC 350, i.e. EN 15804 et al.

However, EPDs have issues that need to be resolved. There are no common rules (Product Category Rules or PCRs) about how the standard should be applied. Each EPD scheme owner can adopt its own PCRs as it stands. EPDs are created using impact datasets for the raw materials used in the manufacturing of the product. There are multiple databases containing various datasets that yield different results, and these datasets may be generic or may not always correspond well to the raw materials used for the specific product.

Today there is no requirement that EPD data must be provided by a manufacturer, although it is intended that the EU Construction Product Regulation (CPR) will require it in future. However, when that happens there will be products for which CPR does not apply as they lack a harmonised standard, hence there will still be no universal requirement.

As a general principle, carbon comparisons should only be made at whole-building, whole-life level, because, as well as having an impact on the operational emissions of a building, choices made about some materials can have an impact on the choice of other materials and the quantities of those materials that might be required. However, as it is an unavoidable fact that comparisons between the embodied carbon of building materials will be made, as problematic as that is, then the person conducting the comparison needs to consider the following.

The way manufacturers choose to put together EPDs can vary. For insulation in particular, the unit of comparison of EPDs (their “functional unit”) should be based on an equivalent thermal performance using the actual density of the products being compared, rather than a simple weight- or volume-based comparison. Because different insulation materials have vastly different thermal properties, they require vastly different thicknesses to achieve the same performance. Similarly, because they have vastly differing densities, the weights of the products to achieve the same performance can be vastly different. A simple comparison per m3 or per kg is likely to give a highly distorted and unreliable comparison of EPD data.

Another issue for long-life products like insulation is the impact assessment at end-of-life for the product. Today most EPDs will assume that insulation materials are either landfilled or incinerated at end-of-life. Both end of life options come with global warming impact and thus embodied carbon. However, neither of those practices are likely to exist or be done in the same way in 60 years, when the products sold today are likely to be removed from a building. Therefore, the impact assessment is likely to be misleading.

Our commitments

Kingspan is developing EPDs for its high-performance insulation and insulated panel products. A majority of QuadCore and Kooltherm products are already covered in key markets.

The embodied carbon in Kingspan products is largely dependent on the raw materials we purchase from our suppliers to manufacture our products. To address this, Kingspan, through our 10-year Planet Passionate program, has committed to achieve, by 2030, a 50% reduction in the embodied carbon intensity in the raw materials we source from our primary suppliers, with a focus initially is on steel and chemical suppliers. Kingspan has also been accredited by the Science-Based Targets initiative for its commitment to reduce scope 3 (indirect) carbon emissions by of 42% by 2030[3].

Furthermore, we have committed to transform our manufacturing processes to be net zero carbon by 2030 which will reduce the embodied carbon of our products.

Collaboration

Kingspan is working with the WGBC to their work to promote net zero carbon buildings through their global Advancing Net Zero project.

Kingspan is a sponsor of the Buildings Performance Institute of Europe (BPIE), the top EU-level policy research institute on buildings regulation. BPIE has launched research into current measures on embodied carbon in buildings policies in the EU.

Kingspan Group is investing in H2 Green Steel, a company which is pioneering new low-carbon production methods for steel manufacturing using hydrogen. The intention is to enter into a long-term supply agreement with H2 Green Steel to supply a substantial share of our future steel requirements. Kingspan is the first building materials company to make a commitment to procure H2 Green Steel at scale.

[1] World Green Building Council: Bringing Embodied Carbon Upfront 2019

[2] Kingspan has undertaken studies on the embodied carbon of its material compared to other alternatives – as well as the embodied carbon of the material compared in a Whole Life Cycle assessment with the energy savings over a lifetime coming from the use of the material. See both case studies at Planet Planet Passionate Annual Report.

[3] Ambitious corporate climate action - Science Based Targets

Home
The Role of EPDs in Addressing Embodied Carbon in Buildings