Environmental Product Declaration Reporting in the Metal Sector †

: In an increasingly globalized and sustainability-conscious market, the environmental attributes of products consist of the information of primary importance for the sustainable development of manufacturing companies. The aim of the paper is to statistically analyze the Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) reports that have resulted from Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) in the metal products industry based on two parameters: (i) the geographical scope and (ii) the category of the product. During recent years, EPDs have been developed as a tool for the carbon footprint assessment of products; however, they not yet very widely applied by metal-manufacturing companies and/or requested by key stakeholders as customers. Moreover, in the metal industry, the use of EPD reports is not yet as widespread as in other industrial segments such as plastics. The present article is based on the EPD Library of the official website of the International EPD System (Environdec) and the published EPDs of the Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. (IBU). Data were extracted, and the relevant information was compiled by using the available filters of the EPD and the IBU Libraries. Based on these data, the number of EPD reports issued by manufacturing companies was examined as per country of origin and product category.


Introduction
Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) is a guide for recording and communicating reliable information on the environmental performance of product-manufacturing processes [1].It is a particularly important tool for benchmarking and comparing the environmental footprint of products between companies and industries of the same sector.
As metals constitute the fundamental input materials for various industries, such as construction and infrastructure industries, their resulting products make a significant contribution to the global markets and the economy.The assessment of the environmental footprint of metals is important, due to the direct connection of metals with both the natural and the man-made environment.
EPD stems from Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which is considered as a well-established analytical method to quantify environmental impacts of a product, a service, or a production process [2].
The purpose of this article is to analyze the EPD reports of the metal sector as recorded in the major registration archives.The International EPD System is a leading global program for EPD registration.Its EPD Library holds EPDs reports, from many different industries, allowing comparisons between products.By adopting the relevant filters, comparisons by country of origin and product category are enabled.Similarly, the Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. (IBU) website has a detailed archive of products that have EPD certification from the organization, classified by main category, product category, Product Category Rules (PCR), declaration number, D/N standard (EN 15804 + A1, EN 15804 + A2) [3,4], or language in which the EPD is published.
Product-based categorization can be particularly useful, as it highlights which products are more harmful to the environment, providing industries the basis to replace them or modify their manufacturing method in a more ecological way.In the present case, the categorization of metal products is intended to provide a clear picture of the companies involved in this industrial sector and their relationship with the disclosure of EPDs.
In addition, the geographical perspective is an important categorization of EPDs as it allows many conclusions to be drawn regarding the environmental performance of countries that dominate the metal sector, but also of regions that really promote sustainability and green transition.
In the following sections, the methodology used for the categorization of EPD reports by country will be presented, followed by the analysis and discussion of the compiled data (the number of EPDs per country are presented in Figures).Finally, conclusions will be drawn, and suggestions will be made to improve the sustainability performance of the metal sector.

Literature Survey
In this section, a short summary of the relevant literature on the definitions of EPD and LCA will be presented, whereas the differences between the systems presenting EPD data such as the International EPD System (Environdec) and the Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. (IBU) will be analyzed.

EPD
Various mechanisms have been developed to calculate the environmental footprint of different products, many of which belong to the ISO Standards Group.The ISO group proposes Environmental Labelling (Type I) [5], Self-declared Environmental Claims (Type II [6]), and Environmental Declarations (Type III) [7] as the possible environmental communication instruments that can be applied by companies in order to determine and present the EPD of a product [8].Type III is the main focus of this paper.
The purpose of Type III (EPD) is to provide objective information on the environmental footprint of products from many different industrial sectors.However, it is important to note that there are no specific legal requirements for a product to obtain EPD certification [9].Since the main aim of this assessment is the comparison between similar products, there is a basic product categorization (PCR).For each product, to be a part of a specific product category, it must fall within the boundaries of the PCR in question.The PCRs are intended to determine norms for the creation of the corresponding EPDs [10].
EPDs created following the EN 15804:2012 group (European Norm provides core product category rules (PCR) for Type III Environmental Declarations for any construction product and construction service.)divide environmental concerns into key categories like global warming potential (GWP), ozone depletion potential (ODP), the acidification of soil and water (AP-Acidification Potential) and eutrophication potential (EP) [11].However, in addition to these basic categories, depending on the organization generating the EPD, there may be variations or additional information.

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)
The impact categories and their values reported in the EPDs are defined through Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), which quantifies the environmental impacts of the components and processes involved in the whole life cycle of a product [12].LCA is a process through which the environmental impacts of a product, a process, or an activity are analyzed [13,14].
The first LCA studies were carried out in the 1960s and included basic data such as the total energy consumption for the life cycle of each product.Over the years, the amount information has increased and become more detailed.The basic steps to create an LCA study are as follows [15]:

•
Capture the objective of the specific study and the boundaries within which it will be carried out.• Analyze the numerical data related to energy consumption, gas emissions, water consumption, and waste generated.

•
Conduct impact assessment, consisting of classification, characterization, and valuation, where the potential environmental impacts of the system are evaluated.

•
Draw conclusions based on the obtained results and propose the possible solutions to improve the environmental footprint.
While the methodology follows the above basic guidelines and is based on ISO 14040 (environmental management-Life Cycle Assessment-principles and framework) and 14044 (environmental management-Life Cycle Assessment-requirements and guidelines), the rules allow the freedom of interpretation of key methodological issues [16].The result is that in many cases, the different units of measurement or the different product categorizations (PCRs) are used.This leads to LCA studies and then to EPDs, which, although they refer to similar products, are not always comparable [17].

Organizations to Issue EPD Certificates
International EPD System and Institut Bauen und Umwelt e.V. are the two main organizations selected by companies in Europe to create EPD certificates.Their general guidelines for the development of EPDs are similar, with some differences presented below.
The International EPD System is an international organization based in Sweden, while the IBU is a German organization.Although the systems used by both organizations are based on the same ISO (14025: Environmental Labels and Declarations), mentioned above, there are differences in the methodology used.More specifically, the PCR categorization (Product Category Rules) is not the same in both organizations; thus, it is not very easy to compare the EPDs of similar products.More importantly, there are differences in the products for which they produce EPD reports.The International EPD System (Environdec) deals with a wide range of products such as construction materials, food packaging, electronics, etc., whereas the IBU is mainly limited to building and construction materials and products [18,19].The main product categories of the two organizations are listed in Table 1.

Methodology
Regarding EPDs, the central question used to guide this study was the following: 'what is the status of the EU countries regarding the registration of EPDs, on the products of the metal sector'?To address this question, the EPDs of the Environdec and the IBU site were initially examined.
The first step was the selection of products to be assessed which for the purpose of the present study were decided to be the metal products, i.e., the products where the largest percentage of the composition consists of metals, to assess the environmental footprint of this industry.Then, it was decided that the research would focus on European countries, to examine the countries that use EPD certificates, in a geographic area where a major emphasis is given to environmental protection and green transition.The examined countries included the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU), the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), the EU candidate countries (with the exception of Turkey), the potential candidate countries, and the United Kingdom [20].
The next step was the selection of suitable organizations for the development and accreditation of EPDs on which the study was based.As already noted, the two most widely used systems in Europe are the International EPD System (Environdec) and the IBU system, and both have data on all the EPDs that they have issued.In the case of Environdec, the 'Metal and mineral' filter was used, and then, only the EPDs of the metal products were selected.It should be mentioned that in the case of Environdec, the categories were further searched because there were metal products in other categories too.Of the products that met the above condition, the ones whose manufacturers are in Europe and present valid EPDs were selected for further examination.However, it was subsequently noted that metal products are also contained in other product categories such as 'construction products' and 'infrastructure and buildings'.Thus, these additional products were also included in the metal products' data set.On the other hand, the IBU website did not offer the possibility to use such filters in order to retrieve EPDs of metal products.Although there was a categorization, noted in Section 1, it was not possible to categorize metal products.Thus, it was necessary to carry out an extensive check of all EPD records in order to identify which of those records referred to metal products.
All the EPDs of the metal products that were finally selected were recorded in Excel spreadsheets and categorized by country.A separate spreadsheet was created for each organization, Environdec and IBU, along with a common spreadsheet containing the aggregated EPDs of each organization for each country.The code name of the European countries used can be found in Table A1 of Appendix A, and the number of interviews that were conducted in each country can be found in Table A2 of Appendix B. It is noted that the primary aim for the codification of the EPDs was to also categorize metal products based on their PCRs, but this was not possible as each of the two examined organizations had a different PCR classification.Thus, data compiled were graphically presented so as to illustrate what is the status of each of the concerned countries regarding the overall number of EPDs for metal products.

Results
The number of EPDs in the metal products sector in the examined European countries are presented in Figures 1-4, respectively.

IBU
Based on the IBU database (Figure 1), it was shown that Germany (DE) has the highest number of EPDs for metal products.In particular, 147 EPDs were recorded in Germany, with Sweden and Luxembourg being the next countries in terms of EPDs with 25 and 21 EPDs, respectively.Austria, France, and Denmark follow with 15, 8, and 6 EPDs, respectively, whereas Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, and Sweden report less than 5 EPDs.The other examined European countries have no EPDs according to the IBU.Metal products whose EPDs are listed in the IBU database include wires, wire rods, strands, profile, panels, sheets, extrusion studs, bars, pipes, plates, hot and cold-rolled products, tubes, coils, railways, building metals and hardware products, and valves and doors, produced mainly from aluminum, steel, and copper.and 21 EPDs, respectively.Austria, France, and Denmark follow with 15, 8, and 6 EPDs, respectively, whereas Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, and Sweden report less than 5 EPDs.The other examined European countries have no EPDs according to the IBU.Metal products whose EPDs are listed in the IBU database include wires, wire rods, strands, profile, panels, sheets, extrusion studs, bars, pipes, plates, hot and cold-rolled products, tubes, coils, railways, building metals and hardware products, and valves and doors, produced mainly from aluminum, steel, and copper.

International EPD System
When the Envirodec s EPD Library is used as a basis, the number of EPDs of metal products listed per country differ from that of the IBU (Figure 2).Sweden is identified as the country with the highest number of EPDs for metal products, with a final number of 105.Spain, Italy, Greece, and France follow Sweden with 55, 54, 42, and 41 EPDs, respectively.For Germany, Finland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Portugal, and Poland, 25, 24, 12, 8, 7, and 6 EPDs of metal products were recorded, while for countries such as Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Romania, and Slovakia less than 5 EPDs were recorded.For the other examined European countries, no EPDs for metal products were reported according to Environdec.Metal products whose EPDs are listed in the Envirodec s EPD Library include steel billets, steel oil country tubular goods (OCTG), steel railways, steel ingots, pipes, wire rods, hot or cold-rolled products, profiles, meshes, sheets, panels, reinforcing bars, coils, and tubes.

International EPD System
When the Envirodec's EPD Library is used as a basis, the number of EPDs of metal products listed per country differ from that of the IBU (Figure 2).Sweden is identified as the country with the highest number of EPDs for metal products, with a final number of 105.Spain, Italy, Greece, and France follow Sweden with 55, 54, 42, and 41 EPDs, respectively.For Germany, Finland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Portugal, and Poland, 25, 24, 12, 8, 7, and 6 EPDs of metal products were recorded, while for countries such as Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Romania, and Slovakia less than 5 EPDs were recorded.For the other examined European countries, no EPDs for metal products were reported according to Environdec.Metal products whose EPDs are listed in the Envirodec's EPD Library include steel billets, steel oil country tubular goods (OCTG), steel railways, steel ingots, pipes, wire rods, hot or cold-rolled products, profiles, meshes, sheets, panels, reinforcing bars, coils, and tubes.and 21 EPDs, respectively.Austria, France, and Denmark follow with 15, 8, and 6 EPDs, respectively, whereas Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, and Sweden report less than 5 EPDs.The other examined European countries have no EPDs according to the IBU.Metal products whose EPDs are listed in the IBU database include wires, wire rods, strands, profile, panels, sheets, extrusion studs, bars, pipes, plates, hot and cold-rolled products, tubes, coils, railways, building metals and hardware products, and valves and doors, produced mainly from aluminum, steel, and copper.

International EPD System
When the Envirodec s EPD Library is used as a basis, the number of EPDs of metal products listed per country differ from that of the IBU (Figure 2).Sweden is identified as the country with the highest number of EPDs for metal products, with a final number of 105.Spain, Italy, Greece, and France follow Sweden with 55, 54, 42, and 41 EPDs, respectively.For Germany, Finland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Portugal, and Poland, 25, 24, 12, 8, 7, and 6 EPDs of metal products were recorded, while for countries such as Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Romania, and Slovakia less than 5 EPDs were recorded.For the other examined European countries, no EPDs for metal products were reported according to Environdec.Metal products whose EPDs are listed in the Envirodec s EPD Library include steel billets, steel oil country tubular goods (OCTG), steel railways, steel ingots, pipes, wire rods, hot or cold-rolled products, profiles, meshes, sheets, panels, reinforcing bars, coils, and tubes.

Comparison between the Two Organizations
In Figure 3, the results compiled for both the examined accreditation systems regarding the overall number of EPDs for metal products per country are presented after being converted into percentages in order to allow for easier graphical representation.Differences are reported between the two tools (Figure 3), both regarding the country with the highest number of reported EPDs for metal products and the number of reported EPDs for the examined countries.Moreover, the specific metal products for which EPDs were reported differ amongst the two databases.
According to both tools, no records for EPDs for metal products were reported for the following countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Kosovo, Liechtenstein, Malta, Montenegro, Moldova, North Macedonia, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Serbia, Slovenia, and Ukraine.

Comparison between the Two Organizations
In Figure 3, the results compiled for both the examined accreditation systems regarding the overall number of EPDs for metal products per country are presented after being converted into percentages in order to allow for easier graphical representation.Differences are reported between the two tools (Figure 3), both regarding the country with the highest number of reported EPDs for metal products and the number of reported EPDs for the examined countries.Moreover, the specific metal products for which EPDs were reported differ amongst the two databases.
According to both tools, no records for EPDs for metal products were reported for the following countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Kosovo, Liechtenstein, Malta, Montenegro, Moldova, North Macedonia, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Serbia, Slovenia, and Ukraine.

Overall Results
The overall numbers of EPDs for metal products for both systems were summed up, and the results, distributed per country, are presented in Figure 4. Germany is the country with the highest number of EPDs for metal products, amounting to 26% of the total number of reported EPDs, followed by Sweden with 20%.Italy, France, and Greece with 9%, 7%, and 6% of the total number of reported EPDs, respectively.

Overall Results
The overall numbers of EPDs for metal products for both systems were summed up, and the results, distributed per country, are presented in Figure 4. Germany is the country with the highest number of EPDs for metal products, amounting to 26% of the total number of reported EPDs, followed by Sweden with 20%.Italy, France, and Greece with 9%, 7%, and 6% of the total number of reported EPDs, respectively.

Discussion and Conclusions
The quantitative analysis of the data available in the Environdec and IBU databases regarding the number of reported EPDs for the metal sector of the examined European countries concluded the following.
Germany has the highest number of published EPDs on metal products with 147 rec-

Discussion and Conclusions
The quantitative analysis of the data available in the Environdec and IBU databases regarding the number of reported EPDs for the metal sector of the examined European countries concluded the following.
Germany has the highest number of published EPDs on metal products with 147 records in IBU and 25 in Environdec.It is noted that Germany is the largest producer of metal products, with revenues from this industry reaching EUR 22 billion in 2021.The next two countries in the ranking of revenues from the production of metal products for 2021 are Italy and France, with revenues of EUR 11 billion and EUR 10 billion, respectively [21].At the same time, these two countries hold the third and fourth positions in the ranking of EPD publications for metal products with 3 records (Italy) and 8 records (France) in IBU and 54 (Italy) and 41 (France) in Environdec.
The country with the second-highest number of published EPDs metal products is Sweden with 25 records in IBU and 105 in Environdec.It is noted that Sweden, another major European metal producer, gives a high priority to sustainable development, and in 2021, it was ranked second in the Europe Sustainable Development Report [22].In the same period, Germany, Italy, and France were ranked sixth, twenty-third, and tenth, respectively, in the Europe Sustainable Development Report [22].
It is noted that while both IBU and Environdec have published EPDs of similar product categories, each industrial producer has the freedom to select the organization where they wish to post the EPD for a product; therefore, no overlap between the EPD records of the two examined organizations occurs.
Regarding the use of PCR in the disclosure and classification of EPD reports, it was observed that the two standards use different PCR categorizations.To facilitate the comparison between the environmental footprint of the various metal products, all EPD records, independent of the accrediting organization, could follow the same PCR categorization, as this is the main purpose of the EPD reporting.
Based on the review of the Environdec and IBU databases, almost 50% of European countries examined the present EPD reports on metal products.This research, as mentioned above, is based on the two most widely used tools for the creation of EPD publications in Europe, but this does not mean that there are no other systems used for the same task.Thus, it is very likely that countries with no reports identified on metal products in the present study may use organization other than the Environdec and the IBU.It is also noted that the number of EPDs develops over time as more products are being evaluated and new EPDs are registered.Therefore, the official sources or databases mentioned above need to be periodically assessed to obtain up-to-date information on EPDs.
Therefore, the wider development and the use of this tool within Europe is expected given its importance and significance for the assessment and comparison of the environmental footprint of the examined metal sector.Furthermore, the implementation of EPD tool and methodology across the metal industry is important for assessing the environmental and sustainability performance of metal-producing companies and assist in setting the future targets for its further improvement.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Number of EPDs for metal products per country examined based on the IBU database.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Number of EPDs for metal products per country examined based on the IBU database.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Number of EPDs for metal products per country examined based on the IBU database.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Number of EPDs for metal products per country examined based on the Environdec.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Number of EPDs for metal products per country examined based on the Environdec.

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Number of EPDs of metal products per country according to IBU and Environdec.

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Number of EPDs of metal products per country according to IBU and Environdec.

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Percentage (%) distribution of EPDs for metal products according IBU and Environdec for the examined countries.

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Percentage (%) distribution of EPDs for metal products according IBU and Environdec for the examined countries.

Table 1 .
Main product categories of Environdec and IBU databases.

of EPDs for metal products according to IBU
CountryNumber

of EPDs for metal products according to IBU
CountryNumber