TABLE 1: Materials Carbon Data

Table 1a: Global Modifiers Tables

General note: Carbon Factor references are referring to cradle to gate (A1-A3), and do not include transportation or on-site fabrication and workmanship. A3 (Transportation) is calculated by distanceXmodeXmass below. A5 is accounted for by this contingency. RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY: Neet more A5 data for landscape specific projects.

High range: 4% (from WBLCAs) (Puettmann et al., 2021); Low range: 1% (From WBLCAs) (Kumanayake & Luo, 2018).

15-25 % reduction, assume 15% from high baseline, 25% from low

(Cannon et al., 2021), (Lehne & Preston, 2018), (FHA, 2011)

10-15 % reduction, assume 10% from high baseline, 15% from low

(Cannon et al., 2021), (Lehne & Preston, 2018), (FHA, 2011)

Assume Type IS substitute low (40% savings) (minus low baseline), GGBS mix for 95% Savings (low) (minus high baseline);

(Cannon et al., 2021), (Lehne & Preston, 2018), (FHA, 2011)

(Hamzah et al., 2010), (Gui et al., 2022), (Almeida & Sergio, 2019), (Gao et al., 2018),

High carbon, low% blend (15%), low, high % blend (22%). (Note best for warm climates)

Combined above references - research indicates sasobit can extend range of GTR (ground tire rubber) asphalt into cooler climates but no FHWA references to indicate that.

(GLE, 2018), (Stanford University, 2023),(EPA, 2023)

(GLE, 2018), (Stanford University, 2023),(EPA, 2023)

(Sizirici et al., 2021), (GLE, 2018), (Stephen, 2020), (EPA, 2023),(Shash et al., 2014)

(Sizirici et al., 2021), (GLE, 2018), (Stephen, 2020), (EPA, 2023),(Shash et al., 2014)

Table 1b: Transportation Assumptions

Transportation Assumptions

CO2 kg/ ton-mile

CH4 kg/ ton-mile

N2O kg/ ton-mile

CO2e kg/ ton-mile

CO2e kg/(kg/km)

EPA values from 2020, assume non-renewable energy sources. (Update CH4 added as factor of 25, and N20 added as factor 298, to CO2E for transportation factors).

EPA values from 2020, assume non-renewable energy sources. (Update CH4 added as factor of 25, and N20 added as factor 298, to CO2E for transportation factors).

EPA values from 2020, assume non-renewable energy sources. (Update CH4 added as factor of 25, and N20 added as factor 298, to CO2E for transportation factors).

EPA values from 2020, assume non-renewable energy sources. (Update CH4 added as factor of 25, and N20 added as factor 298, to CO2E for transportation factors).

Table 1c: Landscape Materials Carbon Data

0.06 (Hammond & Jones, 2008), 0.01 (Dabaieh et al., 2020)

0.53 to 0.55 (Mohan, 2016), 0.236 (NSF, 2020), 0.32 (Crawford et al., 2019),

Not available on EC3. Assumptions - Granite for density. Median simple average (low,high)

.01 to .03 Raw (Kittipongvises et al., 2016) 0.01 (Hammond & Jones, 2008),

Not available on EC3. Assumptions - Granite- range scale of blocks - large monolithic is more efficient to cut and finish than finer pieces. Median simple average (low,high)

Limited on EC3. Low end assumptions - Granite, milled through 15000 Kw hours per CM block (low - 8 hours continuous CNC machine time), High end, use architectural cladding EPD. Median simple average (low,high)

.073 to .079 (dressed) (Mohan, 2016), + CNC time (Li et al., 2015); Using EC3 Architectural stone cladding .25, but note only one reference (Building Transparency.org, 2023)

Assume cement for 3000-4000 psi (20.7-27.6 MPa) concrete. Median simple average (low,high)
Mean simple average .

0.6-0.95 kgCO2e/kg (Building Transparency.org, 2023), 0.745 (Antti, 2013), 0.841 (Mukherjee et al., 2011), 0.73-0.74 (Mohan, 2016), .24-.28 , higher end more common in range of Athena (Athena Institute, 2005)

Using Cement Type 1 or 2 as base, times SCM Rate Median simple average (low,high)

Using Cement Type 1 or 2 as base, times SCM Rate (note Tyle 1L has crushed limestone as cement reducer, not the same as portland limestone cement) Median simple average (low,high)

Assume 3000-4000 psi (20.7-27.6 MPa). Selected CLF data points for basis of table, due to use of a wide range of epds, with low and high values projected by a Q1/Q3 box plot. . Selected CLF data points for basis of table, due to use of a wide range of epds, with low and high values projected by a Q1/Q3 box plot.

Precast Concrete (Assume only type 1/ 2 cement) (Typical)

Assume 4000-5000 psi (27.6-34.5 MPa). Selected CLF data points for basis of table, due to use of a wide range of epds, with low and high values projected by a Q1/Q3 box plot. Assume higher cement content - more like cast stone products.

.002 -.014 (Antti, 2013), .024 (Crawford et al., 2019), .02 (Kittipongvises et al., 2016),

Use sand as proxy for soil mining and screening. Assume source of amendment is carbon neutral, and blending process approximately doubles production.

.002 -.014 (Antti, 2013), .024 (Crawford et al., 2019), .02 (Kittipongvises et al., 2016),

.03 (Sizirici et al., 2021), .04-.08(Mitchell, 2012), .014-.041(Antti, 2013), .004-.005(Mohan, 2016), .036(Crawford et al., 2019) .009-.01 (Graniterock, 2018) .007

Assume crushed salvage concrete on site - Estimate based on product estimated fuel (diesel) requirement per ton.

.002 -.004 calculated by equipment pages (MCC, 2023) ; .002 (Jiménez et al., 2018)

.004 (Antti, 2013), .002 (Kittipongvises et al., 2016),

.041 (Antti, 2013), .009-.01 (Graniterock, 2018)

Assume crushed salvage concrete on site - Estimate based on product estimated fuel (diesel) requirement per ton.

.002 -.004 calculated by equipment pages (MCC, 2023) ; .002 (Jiménez et al., 2018) .006 (Athena Institute, 2020)

Average of all cinder block EPDs registered in EC3. Selected EC3 data points for basis of table, due to use of a wide range of epds, with low and high values projected by a Q1/Q3 box plot.

LC3 HMA Average of Global EPDs listed on 4.16.24 - (Sourced from Meg Calkins, 2025)

LC3 WMA Average of Global EPDs listed on 4.16.24 - (Sourced from Meg Calkins, 2025)

LC3 - average of Global Product EPDs listed on 4.16.24 - (Sourced from Meg Calkins, 2025)

LC3 - average of Global Product EPDs listed on 4.16.24 - (Sourced from Meg Calkins, 2025)

4.23 (Mohan, 2016) 5.87 (Koster, 2014), 4.10 (Building Transparency.org, 2023)

Global average; World Steel Association (WSA) 2023, Advised by Meg Calkins, 2025

Global average; World Steel Association (WSA) 2023,Advised by Meg Calkins, 2025

EC3 Average assement conducted by Meg Calkins based on 2023 data, and production through a basic oxygen furnace (BOF)(Note High and Low factors are a simple 20% range based on high/low range for all steel products in EC3).

Galv. Steel (New Material) (Typical = 70% Recycled Steel, 30% Recycled Zinc)

EC3 Average of 8 SS product EPDs 4.24.24 - (Sourced from Meg Calkins, 2025)

Bronze not broken out as bulk product typically on EC3. Median simple average (low,high); note, academic resource bulk material, EPD includes manufactured product

3.73-4 (Mohan, 2016), 7.72 (product) (Institut Bauen und Umwelt, 2017)

Copper only part of wire and data products on EC3. Ekman paper used as base due to the large amount of aggregated academic LCA data included. Median simple average (low,high)

Brass not broken out as bulk product typically on EC3 (components of doors and hardware only).

2.46-2.64 (Mohan, 2016), 1.46 (Product) (Institut Bauen und Umwelt, 2017),

Given range of EPDs, difficult to back out from recycled content impacts for primary. Using Low end of Carlisle study and high end self reported by International Aluminum Institute for basis of range. Median simple average (low,high)

7.344-4.436 (only 2 products, both with 30-40% recycled content) 6-14.1 (industry) (Building Transparency.org, 2023), 8.91- 12.4 (Carlisle et al., 2021), Both for extrusions; 2.980 (Antti, 2013), 8.2-9.16(Mohan, 2016), 8.3-8.4 (33% recycled)(Hammond & Jones, 2008), industry publication for primary 16.6 (International Aluminum, 2021)

Assume a coating is used to prevent excessive replacement costs, density assume spruce. Carlisle data points used based on extensive EPD collection, and correspondence to AWC industry wide EPD for north america.