STS Polyolefin with 100% Post-Industrial Face Fibre

Declaration details

Manufacturer

Shaw Contract (Shaw Europe Ltd.)

Program operator

Smart EPD

Declaration number

SmartEPD-2026-157-1092-01

Date of issue

October 7, 2026

Valid until

October 7, 2031

Product category rules (PCR)

IBU PCR Part B: Requirements on the EPD for Floor Coverings (version 5)

Standard

ISO 14025:2006 and EN 15804:2012+A2:2019

Functional unit

1 m2 of product of installed STS Premium Loop Pile Tufted, Polyolefin Backed Carpet Tile

System boundary

Cradle to grave (A1 - A3, A4, A5, B1 - B7, C1 - C4, D)

Product specificity

Product Specific

Manufacturing specificity

Facility Specific

Manufacturing plant

Shaw Contract (Shaw Europe Ltd.) (Blackaddie Road, Sanquhar, UK)

Product category

Finishes › Flooring › Carpet

Product service life

10 years

Verifier

Beth Cassese, Horizon LCA

LCA software

GaBi 10.0

Program instructions

Smart EPD General Program Instructions v.2.0, March 2025

Life cycle assessment results

Results per 1 m2 of product of installed STS Premium Loop Pile Tufted, Polyolefin Backed Carpet Tile.

Environmental Impact Assessment Results

Resource Use Indicators

Waste and Output Flow Indicators

Carbon Emissions and Removals

ND = not declared. Life cycle modules: A1-A3 product stage, A4-A5 construction process, B use stage, C end of life, D benefits and loads beyond the system boundary.

Material composition

Hazardous substances

None

Scenarios

Transport to the building site (A4)

Fuel type

Diesel

Vehicle type

Truck, Class 8

Transport distance

687 km

Capacity utilization

55%

Packaging mass

3.034 kg

End of life (C1-C4)

Collected separately

2.882 kg

Landfill

2.882 kg

Product or material for final disposal

2.882 kg

Benefits and loads beyond the system boundary (D)

Recycled content of product

55%

Product description

This EPD applies to STS Premium Loop Pile Tufted, Polyolefin Backed Carpet Tile with 100% recycled Nylon face fibre.

The face fibre is made of STS 100% recycled solution-dyed Nylon that is tufted into a primary backing sheet, then latex is added to anchor the fibre in place to assure maximum tuft bind. The polyolefin backing system is then applied to create a durable flooring solution for use in varied applications. The carpet tiles are then die-cut and packaged for distribution.

This STS Premium Loop Pile Tufted, Polyolefin Backed Carpet Tile is a commercial carpet tile, suitable for use in all commercial settings as a floor covering, in accordance with manufacturer guidelines. It has a life span of 10 years and comes with a 10-year wear warranty (subject only to installation and maintenance being carried out in line with manufacturer's guidelines). The product meets both internal and external performance standards including those established in the EU under EN 1307 (CEN 2014) and EN 10874 (CEN 2009) for a product suitable for heavy and general commercial installations.

STS Premium Loop Pile Tufted, Polyolefin Backed Carpet Tile comes in various styles. All styles have the same raw material formulation but different designs. This product is manufactured in the UK in ISO 9001- and ISO 14001-certified facilities, or equivalent (ISO 2015b, 2015a). Raw materials are responsibly sourced through supply chain, chemical and waste management programs. No co-products are produced in the manufacturing of these premium carpet tiles.

Interpretation

(a) Cradle-to-Grave Results

The figure presents the cradle-to-grave (C2Gr) environmental performance of STS Polyolefin Backed Carpet Tile across 19 impact categories using the EF3.1 characterization methodology (aligned with EN15804+A2 construction framework). The results are displayed as a 100% stacked bar chart showing relative contributions from 4 life cycle stages: Production (A1–A3), Construction (A4–A5), Use (B1–B7), and End-of-Life (EoL) (C1–C4). Because the chart presents relative stage contributions only, it identifies the distribution of impacts by life cycle stage but not the absolute magnitude of each indicator.

Global Warming Potential

Production (A1–A3) is the largest GWP contributor at ~57% of GWP-Total and ~59% of GWP-Fossil, reflecting the upstream burdens of raw material extraction and manufacturing. The Use stage (B1–B7) is the second-largest contributor at ~37% and ~35%, respectively. The figure does not disaggregate B-modules; however, if the model assigns use phase burdens primarily to maintenance, these impacts would be associated with Module B2.

GWP-Biogenic is dominated by Production (~88%), reflecting biogenic carbon flows from packaging materials, as the product formulation itself contains no significant organic content. Use contributes ~9%, while Construction and EoL each contribute <3%.

GWP-Luluc is more distributed: Production (~57%), Construction (~24%), and EoL (~10%).

Other Air Indicators

ODP is almost entirely attributable to Production (~99%), driven by upstream dataset characteristics rather than the product formulation. AP, PM, and POCP follow a consistent pattern: Production ~74–79%, Use ~17–22%, and Construction and EoL <3% each.

Eutrophication and Ecotoxicity

EP-Marine and EP-Terrestrial follow the dominant pattern (Production ~77%, Use ~18–19%). EP-Freshwater is the exception: EoL is the largest contributor at ~43%, with Production (~24%), Construction (~16%), and Use (~17%) sharing the remainder. This indicates that waste disposal pathways carry freshwater eutrophication burdens proportionally more significant than in other categories. ETP-Fwio follows the typical distribution (Production ~69%, Use ~25%).

Resource Depletion and Human Toxicity

ADP-Fossil is driven by Production (~69%) and Use (~27%), reflecting fossil energy consumption in both manufacturing and use-phase activities. ADP-Minerals & Metals follows a similar pattern (Production ~74%, Use ~23%). WDP is more evenly split (Production ~54%, Use ~42%), indicating that use-phase water consumption is a significant contributor.

HTP-Cio and HTP-Ncio are Production-dominated (~60% and ~57%), with Use as secondary (~30% and ~26%). EoL contributes a comparatively larger share to HTP-Ncio (~13%) than to most other categories, indicating that disposal pathways carry non-cancer human toxicity burdens of note.

IRP is the only category where Use dominates (~77%), with Production at ~22%, suggesting that use-phase electricity consumption drives the majority of this impact. SQI is the most evenly distributed: Use (~43%), Production (~31%), Construction (~25%), EoL (~1%).

End-of-Life (EoL)

EoL (C1–C4) generally represents 1–3% of C2Gr impact across categories. The exceptions are EP-Freshwater (~43%), HTP-Ncio (~13%), and GWP-Luluc (~10%), where waste management and disposal activities carry proportionally higher burdens.

Biogenic Carbon

The product formulation does not contain significant organic content. Biogenic carbon flows are associated with packaging materials, consistent with the Production-dominated GWP-Biogenic results.

(b) Contribution/Hotspot Analysis

A contribution (hotspot) analysis was conducted across all 19 EF3.1 categories to evaluate the relative influence of each life cycle stage. The analysis identifies Production and Use as the two primary drivers, with their relative dominance varying by category.

Production (A1–A3): Dominant Hotspot

Production is the largest contributor in 16 of 19 categories, exceeding 70% in 8: ODP (~99%), GWP-Biogenic (~88%), PM (~79%), AP (~74%), POCP (~77%), EP-Marine (~77%), EP-Terrestrial (~77%), and ADP-Minerals & Metals (~74%). In the remaining categories where Production leads, it ranges from ~54–69%, except IRP where it is the secondary contributor (~22%). This concentration reflects the energy-intensive nature of upstream raw material extraction and product manufacturing.

Use (B1–B7): Secondary Hotspot

Use is the second-largest contributor across most categories and the dominant contributor in two: IRP (~77%) and SQI (~43%). It also contributes substantially to WDP (~42%), GWP-Total (~37%), GWP-Fossil (~35%), and HTP-Ncio (~26%).

Category-Specific Hotspots

Several categories deviate from the dominant Production-Use structure:

EP-Freshwater: EoL is the largest contributor at ~43%, the only category where neither Production nor Use leads. This indicates that waste disposal pathways carry freshwater eutrophication burdens proportionally more significant than in other categories.

GWP-Luluc: Construction contributes ~24%, well above its share in most other categories, indicating that transportation and logistics activities contribute proportionally more to land-use-related emissions.

ODP: ~99% concentrated in Production, indicating a single upstream dataset driver rather than the product formulation.

HTP-Ncio: EoL contributes ~13%, higher than in most toxicity categories, indicating that disposal activities carry non-cancer human toxicity burdens of note.

Construction and EoL

Construction (A4–A5) is generally <5%, except GWP-Luluc (~24%), SQI (~25%), and EP-Freshwater (~16%). EoL (C1–C4) is generally <3%, except EP-Freshwater (~43%), HTP-Ncio (~13%), and GWP-Luluc (~10%).

Summary

The hotspot structure is governed by two dominant stages: Production, which drives most impacts, and Use, which is the primary driver for IRP and SQI. Construction and EoL are minor overall but show category-specific influences in land use change, freshwater eutrophication, and non-cancer human toxicity. Findings should be interpreted alongside inventory assumptions, allocation choices, and scenario parameters for transport, use, and EoL modeling. Improvement strategies should prioritize upstream raw material sourcing and manufacturing efficiency, with secondary attention to use-phase optimization.