Emerging bio-based building materials are promoted as low-carbon alternatives to conventional construction products, yet their environmental and economic performance remains uncertain because many technologies are still produced at laboratory or pilot scale. Conventional life cycle assessment (LCA) often relies on deterministic assumptions, limiting its usefulness for early-stage technology assessment and scale-up decisions. This study develops a probabilistic ex-ante LCA and life cycle cost (LCC) framework to evaluate an emerging bio-based panel product under alternative industrial production scenarios. Pilot-scale inventory measurements were normalized to the functional unit, and uncertainty in foreground inputs was characterized using coefficients of variation assigned by measurement basis within the variability range reported by the manufacturer. These input distributions were propagated through Monte Carlo simulation across three scale-up scenarios: Baseline, High-Efficiency, and Clean Energy. Environmental impacts were assessed across life cycle modules A–C, while economic performance was evaluated through probabilistic LCC for production-related modules. Monetized environmental impacts were further estimated using eco-cost coefficients to support joint cost–environment trade-off analysis. Results show that the two pathways deliver benefits along different dimensions. Clean Energy achieves the largest environmental gain, reducing mean Global Warming Potential by approximately 60% relative to Baseline while leaving median life cycle cost unchanged at $132/m 3 , whereas High-Efficiency reduces Global Warming Potential by approximately 30% and lowers median cost to $112/m 3 . The framework offers a transparent basis for comparing production scenarios for an emerging building material before commercial deployment. Because the functional unit is defined by volume, the results support comparison among the modeled scenarios and do not establish equivalence with, or substitution benefit relative to, conventional panel products.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: