The sustainability conversation in construction has long focused on structural materials—concrete’s carbon footprint, steel’s embodied energy, insulation’s thermal performance. Yet hiding behind walls, above ceilings, and beneath floors lies a complex network of systems that can account for 30-40% of a building’s total embodied carbon and virtually 100% of its operational energy consumption: Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) equipment.
As the GCC region pushes toward net-zero buildings and circular economy principles, MEP manufacturers face an emerging reality: Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) are transitioning from optional marketing tools to competitive necessities. From HVAC systems cooling Dubai’s towers to electrical distribution equipment powering Riyadh’s smart cities, MEP products represent the next frontier in construction material transparency.
This guide explores why MEP EPDs matter now, what makes them uniquely challenging, and how manufacturers can position themselves ahead of the inevitable wave of sustainability requirements transforming the Middle East’s building services sector.
Key Takeaways
- MEP systems represent 30-40% of building embodied carbon but have significantly lower EPD adoption than structural materials
- Use-phase energy consumption dominates MEP environmental impact, requiring sophisticated EPD boundaries and modeling
- Green building certifications increasingly scrutinize MEP equipment environmental credentials beyond just energy efficiency ratings
- Complex supply chains and customized configurations make MEP EPDs more challenging than standardized building materials
- Saudi Vision 2030 and UAE Net Zero initiatives create regulatory momentum for MEP transparency
- Digital twins and BIM integration make MEP EPDs increasingly valuable for whole-building sustainability tracking
- First-mover MEP manufacturers gain 2-3 year competitive advantages in sustainability-focused procurement
The MEP Sustainability Blind Spot: Why It’s Ending Now
For decades, MEP equipment lived in a regulatory and market environment fundamentally different from structural building materials. Energy efficiency ratings (EER, COP, seasonal efficiency) dominated, while embodied carbon remained largely invisible.
Why MEP Escaped Early Scrutiny
Several factors created the historical blind spot:
Use-Phase Dominance HVAC systems, for example, consume energy throughout 20-30 year lifespans, with operational emissions dwarfing manufacturing emissions by factors of 10-50x. This made embodied carbon seem irrelevant by comparison.
Technical Complexity MEP systems involve thousands of components from hundreds of suppliers, assembled into project-specific configurations. Creating standardized EPDs felt insurmountable compared to concrete or steel.
Hidden from View Unlike facade systems or interior finishes, MEP equipment occupies mechanical rooms and ceiling plenums, invisible to occupants and designers focused on aesthetics.
Procurement Separation MEP systems often specified by specialized engineers working separately from architects driving sustainability strategies, creating communication gaps.
Regulatory Focus on Performance Building codes emphasized operational efficiency (cooling capacity per watt consumed) rather than manufacturing impacts.
Why Everything Changed in 2025-2026
Multiple converging forces ended MEP’s invisibility:
Net-Zero Commitments UAE’s 2050 net-zero pledge and Saudi Arabia’s climate ambitions require addressing ALL emission sources. As operational energy decarbonizes through renewable electricity, embodied carbon’s relative importance grows dramatically.
Scope 3 Reporting Large contractors and developers must report supply chain emissions (Scope 3), with MEP equipment representing significant portions. Without supplier EPDs, accurate reporting becomes impossible.
Whole-Building LCA Requirements LEED v4.1’s Building Life-Cycle Impact Reduction credit requires comprehensive accounting of ALL major building materials and systems—explicitly including MEP. Projects pursuing this 5-point credit need MEP EPDs.
Digital Construction Workflows BIM models now integrate sustainability data. MEP manufacturers providing digital EPDs gain specification advantages as sustainability becomes automated rather than manual calculation.
Circular Economy Regulations EU regulations and emerging GCC policies emphasize product take-back and recycling. MEP equipment with complex material compositions and valuable metal content becomes priority for circular economy frameworks.
Competitive Differentiation As structural material sustainability becomes baseline expectation, competitive differentiation shifts to previously overlooked categories—creating first-mover advantages for MEP manufacturers.
Expert Quote: “We’ve reached the point where ignorance isn’t bliss—it’s a liability. Developers can’t achieve net-zero commitments, contractors can’t complete Scope 3 reports, and projects can’t maximize LEED points without MEP environmental data. The manufacturers providing that data aren’t just being responsible—they’re becoming indispensable.” — Sustainability Director, Major GCC Contractor
Understanding MEP EPD Complexity: What Makes It Different
MEP EPDs present unique challenges compared to traditional building materials, requiring specialized approaches and realistic expectations.
Challenge 1: Defining Functional Units
Unlike flooring sold by area or concrete by volume, MEP equipment functional units must capture performance:
HVAC Systems:
- Poor approach: “Per unit” (ignores capacity differences)
- Better approach: “Per ton of cooling capacity” or “Per kW of heating”
- Best approach: “Per ton-year of cooling over 20-year lifespan” (accounts for efficiency and durability)
Electrical Distribution:
- Poor approach: “Per switchboard”
- Better approach: “Per amp of capacity”
- Best approach: “Per kWh distributed over equipment lifespan”
Plumbing Fixtures:
- Poor approach: “Per faucet”
- Better approach: “Per fixture with defined flow rate”
- Best approach: “Per million liters delivered over fixture life”
Functional unit selection profoundly affects comparability and usefulness.
Challenge 2: System Boundaries and Use-Phase Inclusion
Most building material EPDs use cradle-to-gate boundaries (manufacturing only). MEP equipment demands different approaches:
Why Use-Phase Matters More for MEP: Consider a commercial chiller:
- Embodied carbon (manufacturing): ~15,000 kg CO2e
- Operational carbon (20-year life at average efficiency): ~500,000 kg CO2e
Use-phase emissions exceed embodied emissions by 30x, making efficiency differences far more significant than manufacturing variations.
EPD Boundary Options:
Cradle-to-Gate (A1-A3):
- Manufacturing only
- Comparable to other building materials
- Ignores use-phase (where most impact occurs)
- Appropriate for component-level EPDs (pumps, fans, individual equipment)
Cradle-to-Grave with Use-Phase (A1-A3 + B6):
- Includes operational energy consumption
- Most meaningful for high-energy equipment
- Requires assumptions about usage patterns, electricity grid mix, maintenance
- Creates comparability challenges (different assumptions between manufacturers)
Modular Approach:
- Report manufacturing (A1-A3) separately
- Provide use-phase data (B6) with clear assumptions
- Allow users to apply project-specific parameters
- Most flexible and transparent approach
Most sophisticated MEP EPDs adopt modular approaches, publishing cradle-to-gate impacts while providing tools for calculating use-phase impacts based on project conditions.
Challenge 3: Complex Bill of Materials
A typical chiller contains:
- Compressor (multiple alloys, copper windings, refrigerants)
- Heat exchangers (copper, aluminum, steel)
- Control systems (circuit boards with precious metals)
- Housing (steel, insulation, powder coating)
- Refrigerant (with distinct GWP considerations)
- Hundreds of fasteners, gaskets, sensors, wiring
Each component has distinct environmental impacts and supply chains. Comprehensive LCA requires:
- Component-by-component inventory
- Supplier environmental data (or industry averages)
- Assembly processes
- Refrigerant handling and potential leakage
This complexity explains why MEP EPDs cost 2-3x more than simpler building material EPDs.
Challenge 4: Product Customization
Unlike standardized products (a specific concrete strength or flooring SKU), MEP systems are often:
- Customized to project specifications
- Available in continuous capacity ranges
- Configured with optional features and controls
- Integrated with other manufacturer’s equipment
EPD Approaches for Customization:
Representative Product EPDs: Create EPDs for typical configurations (small/medium/large), allowing interpolation for custom units.
Product Family EPDs: Define ranges with scaling parameters (e.g., “per ton of capacity”) allowing calculation for any size within family.
Configurator Tools: Advanced manufacturers provide calculators: input your specific configuration, receive environmental impact estimate based on underlying EPD data.
Challenge 5: Refrigerants and High-GWP Materials
Many MEP systems contain materials with extreme Global Warming Potential:
- Legacy refrigerants (R-22): GWP ~1,800
- Common refrigerants (R-410A): GWP ~2,088
- Newer alternatives (R-32): GWP ~675
- Low-GWP alternatives (R-454B): GWP ~466
Small refrigerant quantities have disproportionate climate impacts:
- 5 kg of R-410A leaking = ~10,000 kg CO2e (equivalent to 7 tons of concrete)
EPD Considerations:
- Manufacturing impacts (refrigerant production)
- Use-phase leakage rates (based on equipment type and maintenance)
- End-of-life recovery and destruction
- Comparison between refrigerant options
Refrigerant management can dominate MEP equipment climate impacts, requiring careful LCA modeling.
Did You Know? Refrigerant leakage from HVAC systems globally contributes emissions equivalent to nearly 200 coal-fired power plants. Proper refrigerant management and low-GWP alternatives reduce climate impact as much as energy efficiency improvements—making comprehensive EPDs that include refrigerant considerations crucial.
MEP Categories: Sector-Specific EPD Approaches
Different MEP sectors require tailored EPD strategies reflecting their unique characteristics.
HVAC Equipment: The Energy-Intensive Giant
Equipment Categories:
- Chillers and cooling towers
- Air handling units (AHUs) and fan coil units (FCUs)
- Variable refrigerant flow (VRF) systems
- Packaged rooftop units
- Boilers and heat pumps
EPD Priorities:
- Use-phase energy modeling: Operational emissions dominate, requiring sophisticated efficiency analysis
- Refrigerant management: Type, quantity, leakage rates, end-of-life recovery
- Heat exchanger materials: Copper and aluminum environmental impacts significant
- Capacity normalization: EPDs per ton or kW of capacity
GCC-Specific Considerations:
- Extreme cooling loads (Dubai summer design temperatures)
- High operating hours (nearly year-round cooling)
- Sand and dust exposure affecting maintenance and efficiency
- Water-cooled vs. air-cooled system trade-offs in water-scarce environments
Market Leaders: Carrier, Trane, Daikin have published EPDs for major product lines, setting precedents for comprehensive HVAC environmental disclosure.
Electrical Distribution: The Hidden Metals Story
Equipment Categories:
- Switchgear and distribution panels
- Transformers
- Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS)
- Cable management systems
- Emergency generators
EPD Priorities:
- Metal content: Copper, aluminum, steel represent majority of embodied impacts
- Electrical losses: Transformer efficiency affects use-phase energy waste
- SF6 in switchgear: Sulfur hexafluoride has extreme GWP (23,500x CO2), small quantities matter enormously
- Lifespan and recyclability: Long service lives and high-value metal recovery
Emerging Concerns:
- SF6 alternatives: GCC projects increasingly specify SF6-free switchgear, requiring EPD documentation
- Recycled content: Electrical equipment with high recycled copper/aluminum content gaining traction
- Digital optimization: Smart electrical systems reducing distribution losses
Regional Manufacturing: UAE and Saudi Arabia have significant electrical equipment manufacturing, creating opportunities for local EPDs with lower transportation impacts.
Plumbing Systems: Water Efficiency Meets Material Impacts
Equipment Categories:
- Pumps and pump systems
- Water heaters and boilers
- Fixtures (faucets, showerheads, toilets)
- Piping systems (PVC, CPVC, copper, PEX)
- Greywater and wastewater treatment
EPD Priorities:
- Water efficiency: Use-phase water consumption in water-scarce GCC environment
- Pump energy: Operational energy for water circulation
- Pipe material selection: PVC vs. copper vs. alternatives (different embodied carbon profiles)
- Fixture longevity: Durability affecting replacement cycles
GCC Innovation:
- Greywater recycling systems reducing potable water demand
- Solar water heating integration
- Advanced leak detection reducing water waste
Certification Synergies: WaterSense (North America) and local water efficiency programs complement EPD environmental data.
Fire Protection and Life Safety: Specialized Equipment
Equipment Categories:
- Sprinkler systems and fire pumps
- Smoke control systems
- Emergency lighting
- Fire alarm and detection systems
EPD Considerations:
- Lower environmental impact overall (limited operational energy)
- Long service lives (25-40 years) amortizing embodied carbon
- Maintenance and testing requirements
- End-of-life material recovery
Procurement Focus: Life safety equipment specified by specialized engineers, requiring targeted EPD education and communication strategies.
Building Automation and Controls: Small Footprint, Large Influence
Equipment Categories:
- Building Management Systems (BMS)
- HVAC controls and sensors
- Lighting control systems
- Integrated building platforms
EPD Complexity:
- Small physical footprint (modest embodied carbon)
- Enormous influence on operational efficiency
- Rapid technological obsolescence (short replacement cycles)
- Difficult to define functional units (per building? per controlled system?)
Emerging Importance: As operational carbon declines (renewable energy), controls optimizing efficiency become relatively more important, increasing interest in comprehensive environmental documentation.
Business Case: Why MEP Manufacturers Should Invest in EPDs Now
Moving beyond environmental responsibility, clear business drivers justify MEP EPD investment.
Market Access and Competitive Positioning
Government Procurement Advantages: GCC government projects increasingly include sustainability evaluation:
- Saudi Arabia: Vision 2030 infrastructure requiring environmental documentation
- UAE: Federal and emirate-level projects with sustainability scoring
- Qatar: Post-World Cup continued focus on green building
MEP manufacturers with EPDs gain 5-15% scoring advantages in sustainability-weighted procurements.
Green Building Project Specifications: Projects pursuing LEED, BREEAM, Estidama increasingly specify MEP equipment with environmental documentation:
- Enables Building Life-Cycle Impact Reduction credits
- Supports Material & Resources category points
- Demonstrates commitment beyond minimum energy code compliance
Specification rates improve 20-30% when EPDs available versus competitors without.
International Developer Requirements: Global developers (Brookfield, Lendlease, Mubadala) bring corporate sustainability commitments:
- Supply chain transparency requirements
- Scope 3 emission reduction targets
- Preference for suppliers with verified environmental data
EPDs satisfy these requirements, avoiding disqualification.
Risk Mitigation and Future-Proofing
Regulatory Trajectory: While not mandatory today, regulatory direction is clear:
- EU’s Ecodesign Directive: Expanding to broader product ranges
- Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM): Eventually affecting MEP exports to Europe
- GCC initiatives: National climate plans cascading to sectoral requirements
Investing in EPDs now provides 2-3 years preparation before requirements crystallize.
Scope 3 Pressure: As construction companies face Scope 3 reporting requirements, they pressure suppliers for environmental data. Manufacturers without EPDs risk losing major accounts to competitors who can provide needed documentation.
ESG and Investment: MEP manufacturers seeking investment or favorable financing increasingly need ESG credentials. EPDs demonstrate measurable environmental responsibility beyond aspirational statements.
Operational and Innovation Benefits
Supply Chain Insights: LCA process reveals environmental hotspots:
- Component suppliers contributing disproportionate impacts
- Transportation optimization opportunities
- Material substitution possibilities
Several manufacturers report cost reductions from optimization identified during EPD development.
Product Development Guidance: EPD data informs next-generation product design:
- Prioritizing improvements with greatest environmental impact
- Quantifying benefits of design changes
- Supporting marketing claims for improved products
Technical Differentiation: In commoditized markets (pumps, distribution equipment), EPDs provide differentiation:
- Demonstrates technical sophistication
- Appeals to sustainability-focused engineers
- Supports premium positioning
Sample ROI: Commercial HVAC Manufacturer
Investment:
- Initial EPD development (3 product families): $75,000
- Annual maintenance and expansion: $15,000
- Sales training and marketing: $20,000
- Total first-year investment: $110,000
Benefits (Conservative Estimates):
- Government tender advantages: $2.5M additional annual revenue
- Green building specifications: $1.8M additional annual revenue
- Avoided loss of major account requiring Scope 3 data: $3M retained revenue
- Total annual benefit: $7.3M
Operating Margin Impact: At 12% operating margin: $876,000 additional annual profit
Payback Period: 1.5 months
Five-Year Net Benefit: Over $4 million cumulative net benefit
While specific results vary, the business case for MEP EPDs is compelling for manufacturers serving GCC markets with sustainability-focused segments.
Implementation Roadmap for MEP Manufacturers
Phase 1: Strategic Assessment (Weeks 1-4)
Define Scope and Priorities:
- Which product categories face strongest sustainability pressure?
- What certifications do target projects pursue?
- Which competitors have EPDs already?
- What regulatory requirements are emerging?
Assess Data Readiness:
- Manufacturing data quality and availability
- Supply chain transparency
- Component environmental data from suppliers
- Historical product performance and lifespan data
Secure Stakeholder Buy-In:
- Present business case to leadership
- Engage engineering teams (product knowledge essential)
- Involve sales and marketing (EPD application)
- Budget allocation for multi-year program
Phase 2: Infrastructure Development (Months 2-4)
Data Collection Systems: Implement tracking for:
- Material quantities per product/configuration
- Energy consumption in manufacturing
- Component sourcing and transportation
- Packaging and shipping data
- Warranty and service records (inform lifespan assumptions)
Supply Chain Engagement:
- Request EPDs from major component suppliers
- Obtain environmental data where EPDs unavailable
- Establish ongoing data sharing protocols
- Consider supplier requirements in procurement
Team Building:
- Identify internal LCA champion
- Engage EPD consultants with MEP expertise
- Train technical staff on LCA principles
- Prepare sales team for sustainability conversations
Phase 3: Pilot EPD Development (Months 4-8)
Select Initial Product: Choose product that is:
- Representative of broader portfolio
- High volume or strategic importance
- Has environmental advantages to highlight
- Relatively well-documented
Conduct LCA:
- Define functional unit and system boundaries
- Model manufacturing processes
- Calculate environmental indicators
- Analyze use-phase scenarios
- Identify improvement opportunities
Develop EPD:
- Select EPD program operator
- Identify or develop applicable PCR
- Prepare EPD document
- Complete third-party verification
- Register and publish
Learn and Optimize:
- Document lessons learned
- Refine data collection processes
- Identify efficiency improvements for subsequent EPDs
- Gather feedback from pilot EPD use
Phase 4: Portfolio Expansion (Months 8-18)
Scale EPD Coverage:
- Develop EPDs for priority product families
- Leverage learnings from pilot
- Establish production rhythm (2-3 EPDs per quarter)
- Balance speed with quality
Integration with Business Processes:
- Incorporate EPD data in technical documentation
- Train sales teams on EPD communication
- Integrate into BIM objects and configurators
- Include in RFP responses and project submissions
Market Communication:
- Develop case studies of EPD use in projects
- Present at industry conferences
- Engage with specifier community
- Digital marketing highlighting environmental leadership
Phase 5: Continuous Improvement (Ongoing)
Product Optimization:
- Use LCA insights to guide next-generation designs
- Quantify environmental improvements
- Update EPDs as products evolve
Program Maintenance:
- Plan for five-year EPD renewal cycles
- Monitor evolving standards and requirements
- Expand coverage to additional product categories
- Benchmark against competitors
Thought Leadership:
- Participate in industry PCR development
- Contribute to MEP sustainability standards
- Share best practices (builds market credibility)
- Influence regulatory development
Overcoming MEP EPD Barriers
Barrier 1: “Our Products Are Too Customized for Standard EPDs”
Reality Check: Customization is challenge, not insurmountable barrier. Solutions include:
- Representative product EPDs (small/medium/large configurations)
- Parametric EPDs with scaling factors
- Online configurators providing custom calculations
- Bounding analyses (best-case/worst-case scenarios)
Many highly customized MEP manufacturers successfully publish EPDs.
Barrier 2: “Use-Phase Energy Dominates, Making Manufacturing Impacts Irrelevant”
Reality Check: While use-phase matters more, embodied carbon isn’t irrelevant:
- As grids decarbonize, embodied carbon’s relative importance grows
- Whole-building LCA requires ALL impacts, including embodied
- Refrigerant and material choices significantly affect total impact
- Circularity and end-of-life increasingly important
Comprehensive sustainability requires addressing both.
Barrier 3: “We Don’t Have Component Supplier EPDs”
Reality Check: Limited supplier data is common. Approaches include:
- Industry-average data from LCA databases
- Generic EPDs for common components
- Simplified modeling for minor components
- Phased approach (improve data quality over time)
Perfect data isn’t required to start; transparency about limitations is.
Barrier 4: “EPD Development Costs Too Much for Our Business”
Reality Check: Costs are real but manageable:
- Start with single high-priority product
- Leverage industry associations (may fund generic EPDs)
- Amortize costs across sales over five-year validity
- Consider competitive disadvantage cost of NOT having EPDs
ROI analysis typically justifies investment within 12-24 months.
Barrier 5: “Our Sales Team Won’t Know How to Use EPDs”
Reality Check: Sales enablement is crucial but achievable:
- Develop simple communication tools
- Focus on value proposition (not technical details)
- Create comparison materials versus competitors
- Provide scripts for common objections
- Ongoing training and support
Sales teams quickly learn when EPDs become competitive advantage.
Myth vs. Fact: Myth: MEP EPDs are only relevant for ultra-sustainable showcase projects. Fact: EPDs matter across project types: government procurements with sustainability scoring, corporate offices with ESG commitments, institutional buildings pursuing certifications, and increasingly, standard commercial projects as sustainability becomes baseline expectation.
Future Trends: Where MEP EPDs Are Heading
Trend 1: Mandatory Environmental Data in Certifications
Current: EPDs optional or contribute bonus points Emerging: Required documentation for certification credits
LEED and similar programs moving toward mandatory environmental data for products contributing significantly to building impacts.
Trend 2: Digital Product Twins
Integration of:
- EPD environmental data
- BIM geometric information
- Performance specifications
- Maintenance requirements
- Real-time operational data
Comprehensive digital representation of MEP equipment throughout lifecycle.
Trend 3: Circular Economy Requirements
Focus on:
- Design for disassembly
- Material recovery and recycling
- Remanufacturing programs
- Extended producer responsibility
EPDs expanding to document circularity, not just virgin production.
Trend 4: Carbon Pricing Impact
As carbon pricing mechanisms expand:
- Low-carbon MEP equipment gains economic advantage
- EPDs enable carbon accounting for credits/trading
- Procurement decisions quantify carbon costs
- Manufacturers with lower impacts command premiums
Trend 5: AI-Optimized System Design
Artificial intelligence:
- Optimizes MEP system design for performance AND environmental impact
- Requires comprehensive EPD databases for equipment options
- Automates whole-building LCA
- Recommends equipment selections balancing multiple objectives
Manufacturers with robust digital EPD data gain AI-era advantages.
Final Thoughts
The MEP industry stands at a pivotal moment. The systems that cool buildings, power operations, and manage water have long operated in sustainability’s shadow, overshadowed by more visible materials and simpler narratives. That era is ending.
As buildings approach net-zero operations through renewable energy and efficient design, the relative importance of embodied carbon—including MEP manufacturing impacts—grows. As whole-building LCA becomes standard practice, the absence of MEP environmental data becomes glaring gap. As circular economy principles spread, MEP equipment with valuable materials and complex compositions becomes priority.
For manufacturers, the choice is clear: lead this transition or scramble to catch up. The leaders investing in EPDs today build competitive advantages compounding over years. They establish relationships with sustainability-focused clients. They develop technical capabilities extending beyond specific products. They position as problem-solvers, not commodity suppliers.
The next wave of construction sustainability runs through mechanical rooms, electrical closets, and plumbing risers. The manufacturers documenting their environmental performance today will be indispensable partners tomorrow.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. How long does it take to develop an EPD for MEP equipment?
Typically 4-8 months for first EPD due to supply chain complexity and data collection challenges. Subsequent EPDs leverage established systems and take 3-5 months. Custom or highly complex equipment may require longer.
2. Should MEP EPDs include use-phase energy consumption?
Ideally yes, especially for energy-intensive equipment (HVAC, pumps). Use modular approach: report manufacturing separately, provide use-phase data with clear assumptions, allow users to apply project-specific parameters for maximum transparency and flexibility.
3. Can one EPD cover our entire product line of varying capacities?
Yes, through product family EPDs with scaling parameters (per ton capacity, per kW, etc.). Define representative configurations, establish scaling relationships, enable calculation for specific sizes. More sophisticated than individual EPDs for each model.
4. Do MEP EPDs cost more than standard building material EPDs?
Generally yes, 50-150% more expensive ($15,000-$40,000+ versus $8,000-$20,000) due to supply chain complexity, component variety, and customization challenges. However, ROI often stronger given higher project values and procurement advantages.
5. What PCRs exist for MEP equipment?
Limited compared to structural materials. Some categories have specific PCRs (electrical switchgear, certain HVAC equipment), others use general construction product PCRs. May need PCR development for novel categories, adding time and cost but creating leadership opportunity.
6. How do refrigerants get handled in HVAC EPDs?
Three aspects: production impacts, use-phase leakage (based on equipment type and maintenance), end-of-life recovery. Must specify refrigerant type and GWP. Low-GWP alternatives (R-32, R-454B) show significantly better performance than legacy refrigerants.
7. Will having an EPD increase our MEP equipment sales?
EPDs improve competitiveness but don’t guarantee sales. They increase win rates on sustainability-focused projects (15-30% improvement), enable access to projects requiring environmental documentation, support premium positioning, and satisfy corporate sustainability requirements. Sales impact strongest when actively communicated by trained sales teams.
Glossary
- Coefficient of Performance (COP): Ratio of heating/cooling provided to energy consumed, key efficiency metric for heat pumps and chillers, critical for use-phase LCA.
- Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): Cooling capacity divided by power input at specific conditions, traditional HVAC efficiency metric, complements but doesn’t replace EPD embodied carbon data.
- SF6 (Sulfur Hexafluoride): Insulating gas used in electrical switchgear with extreme Global Warming Potential (23,500x CO2), small quantities create large climate impacts requiring careful EPD treatment.
- Modular LCA: Approach separating life cycle stages (manufacturing, use, end-of-life) allowing users to combine with project-specific assumptions, particularly valuable for MEP with variable use conditions.
- Bill of Materials (BOM): Complete list of components and quantities in product, foundation for LCA inventory analysis, MEP complexity requires detailed BOM tracking.
- Refrigerant Leakage Rate: Percentage of refrigerant charge lost annually through normal operation, typically 2-10% depending on equipment type, significant use-phase impact in HVAC EPDs.
- Embodied Carbon: Total greenhouse gas emissions from materials, manufacturing, and transportation, distinct from operational carbon (energy use), increasingly important as building operations decarbonize.
- Scope 3 Emissions: Indirect emissions from supply chain (upstream) and product use (downstream), MEP manufacturers become Scope 3 sources for contractors and developers requiring EPD data.
- Functional Unit: Reference basis for EPD comparison, for MEP typically per unit capacity (ton cooling, kW power) over equipment lifespan, enabling meaningful comparison despite size variations.
- Product Category Rules (PCR): Specific LCA and EPD requirements for product category, fewer PCRs exist for MEP than structural materials, creating both challenges and leadership opportunities.
