Abstract:

Objective: This study aims to establish a life cycle dataset for stone-wood-polymer composite flooring to comprehensively quantify the environmental impacts and biological carbon storage of the production process of such flooring, and to compare the environmental performance of this new type of flooring with that of traditional indoor flooring materials to understand its environmental advantages and disadvantages, and to propose measures to enhance the environmental performance of stone-wood-polymer composite flooring, quantify its improvement potential, and provide support for the green and low-carbon development of the industry. Method: This study established a cradle-to-gate life cycle model of stone-wood-polymer composite flooring and quantified its environmental impacts, including primary energy demand (PED), abiotic depletion potential (ADP), global warming potential (GWP), water use (WU), acidification potential (AP), eutrophication potential (EP), respiratory inorganics (RI), ozone depletion potential (ODP), photochemical oxidation formation potential (POFP), ionizing radiation potential (IRP), ecotoxicity (ET), energy conservation and emission reduction (ECER) index, and biogenic carbon stock. Result: The raw material acquisition stage was the largest contributor to midpoint environmental indicators, accounting for over 63% of all indicators. The flooring manufacturing stage contributed 35.76% to the ET, while the transportation stage was a relatively minor contributor. The cradle-to-gate ECER index of 1 m² of stone-wood-polymer composite flooring was 4.12E?11. Polyvinyl chloride and polyethylene were the main environmental hotspots during the raw material acquisition stage, while electricity, natural gas, and diesel were the main hotspots during the flooring manufacturing stage. One square meter of stone-wood-plastic composite flooring had a biogenic carbon stock of 0.12 kg CO₂ eq, accounting for 1.1% of its GWP. To enhance environmental performance, future efforts should focus on improving material efficiency by reducing the consumption of polyvinyl chloride, polyethylene, and calcium carbonate during the production of stone-wood-plastic composite flooring. In addition, energy utilization efficiency should be enhanced by lowering electricity consumption during the manufacturing stage, in order to enhance the environmental performance of stone-wood-polymer composite flooring. Conclusion: This study fills the gap in existing research on the environmental performance of flooring materials. It helps relevant parties such as flooring manufacturers, property developers, designers, consumers, and researchers to understand the comprehensive environmental performance of stone-wood-polymer composite flooring. Based on the production practices of enterprises, feasible improvement measures are proposed, which can provide valuable references for the green and low-carbon development of the stone-wood-polymer composite flooring industry.

Key words: stone-wood-polymer composite flooring, environmental performance, carbon footprint, life cycle assessment, carbon stock