Methodological analysis of selected Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules and remodeling of a Representative Product

The Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) framework, established by the European Commission, is intended to promote consistent and reproducible life cycle assessment (LCA) studies. Specific rules for individual product categories (PEFCRs) can be created by developing a representative product (RP), which is used to define modelling requirements and serves as a quantitative benchmark for average industrial performance. As the PEF framework remains under development, this thesis examines selected methodological aspects with the aim of contributing to its refinement. This thesis includes a systematic breakdown of both the PEF and the PEFCR guidance documents into discrete requirements, which are then compared to assess the internal consistency and coherence of both guidelines. This comparison reveals four conflicting requirements and several redundancies, which may hinder clarity for PEFCR developers. Options to resolve them are discussed and it is recommended to consolidate both documents into a single, unified guideline. Subsequently, two individual PEFCRs were compared to evaluate the consistency of their implementation. Despite general compliance with the overarching framework in most aspects, notable differences were identified in terms of document structure, level of detail, and the inclusion of specific elements such as the product lifetime. Re-examination of the identified guideline inconsistencies indicates that they contribute to challenges throughout the PEFCR development process. To assess the reproducibility and adaptability of studies conducted under an existing PEFCR, a RP was remodelled by using the available documentation. Initial deviations from the benchmark results were traced to insufficient documentation and user induced modelling errors. Following iterative adjustments, all life cycle stages without known model limitations were reproduced within a ± 2.5% deviation from the benchmark, demonstrating the general feasibility of reproducibility. However, to minimize the risk for user-induced variability, the provision of disaggregated RP models compatible with common LCA software solutions is recommended. They could subsequently be modified with company-specific information. Lastly, the Environmental Footprint 3.1 database was evaluated for its ability to represent different product configurations of the selected RP. While material coverage was largely adequate, regional specificity remains limited, as most datasets are based on European or global averages. The inclusion of partially adaptable datasets would enhance the database applicability. The study indicates the potential of the PEF method to reach its goals with the need for refinement in several aspects.