Carbon Footprint Comparisons

The construction industry is at a critical juncture—facing increasing demand and costs for buildings while needing to significantly reduce carbon emissions within a narrow time frame. This report examines how interior flooring choices contribute to a building’s life-cycle carbon footprint and how informed material selection can support long-term sustainability goals.

• A nationwide survey of over 500 UK architects and interior designers revealed:
  • Fewer than 10% are familiar with Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs).
  • Interior designers have the lowest awareness.
  • 99% incorrectly believe recycled content only refers to post-consumer waste.
• There is strong demand for guidance on:
  • Understanding embodied and operational carbon
  • Interpreting EPDs
  • Calculating whole-building carbon footprints.

EPDs: Crucial but Flawed

• EPDs remain the most valuable tool for assessing the carbon impact of materials.
• However, many EPDs:
  • Omit data for installation, maintenance, and end-of-life phases (A4–C4)
  • Use inconsistent measurement units and formats
  • Are based on industry averages rather than product-specific data
  • Rely on potentially flawed biogenic carbon calculations.

Carbon Footprint Comparison: Flooring Options

Using a proposed formula, life-cycle carbon emissions were calculated over a 60-year building lifespan:

• Polyester carpet (10-year life, replaced 6 times):
  • 117.6 kg CO₂e/m² → 235.2 tonnes CO₂e for 2000 m²
• Ceramic tile (60-year life):
  • 15.8 kg CO₂e/m² → 31.6 tonnes CO₂e for 2000 m².

Result: Choosing ceramic tile over polyester carpet saves 203.6 tonnes CO₂e over a 60-year period. See comparison chart below...

Lifecycle Thinking and Sustainability Rankings

• A new methodology ranks materials based on total carbon emissions across all life-cycle stages (A1–C4).
• Natural, long-lasting materials like ceramic tile significantly outperform synthetic, short-lifespan alternatives in total carbon impact.
• Charts and visual tools illustrate the cumulative benefits of long-life materials and encourage alignment between flooring lifespan and building lifespan.

Circularity Challenges

• Recycling rates for flooring are extremely low:
  • Vinyl: ~1%
  • Carpet: ~2%
• Reuse and repurposing are more sustainable but underutilised.
• Many “recycled content” claims refer to pre-consumer waste, not truly circular post-use recovery.

What we can do

To reduce embodied and operational carbon in buildings:

• Design and build for life—select materials that last the full lifespan of the building.
• Use the proposed carbon comparison methodology to inform material selection.
• Shift from short-term design trends to timeless, practical, low-maintenance solutions.

CLICK HERE for more information on our Global Green Tag range of porcelain tiles.