Nordic Swan Ecolabelling and EU Ecolabelling - materials

Hi Lise,

You are right that the VOC content regulations are stricter in EU Ecolabel and Nordic Swan Ecolabelling than in the European Decopaint Directive (2004/42/EC).

But the USGBC table with Low-emitting Materials Third Party Certification and Labels focusses on VOC emissions, not so much on VOC content. It adds information on compliance with the VOC content limits only if a low VOC emitting program also has complying VOC content limits, on top of the VOC emissions limits.

Both EU Ecolabel and Nordic Swan Ecolabelling do not contain VOC emissions limits that would have allowed them to be included in the table of compliant certification programs and labels. Sorry.

You might want to contact the leading manufacturers of painting, sealants, and adhesives. Several of them show compliance of their products with LEED v4 - just without referring to EU Ecolabel or Nordic Swan Ecolabelling.

Mvh, Reinhard

Hi Lise,

When writing LEED v4 criteria, US GBC was not satisfied with emissions limits only for the total emissions, the TVOC, without additional limits for individual VOCs, for formaldehyde and for acetaldehyde. All these limits were required to be at least as stringent as those of Californian CDPH method, having in mind the different testing time schedules of US and EU labelling programs.

Just having reviewed the most recent criteria documents of EU Ecolabel and Nordic Swan regarding paints, adhesives, and sealants, I identify only VOC and SVOC content limits for paints in the EU ecolabel. But this is the content in the product, not the total VOC or SVOC emissions into indoor air. There is no direct correlation between these two characteristics.

The Nordic Swan criteria document on Chemical Building Products, as of March 2018, includes TVOC emissions limits, supplemental to VOC content limits. But it has no limits for the individual VOC substances, as specified by the LCI limits, and for the R value as the overall evaluation of compliance with the LCI limits.

These are the reasons why both programs do not fulfil the requirements of US GBC when they specified the LEED v4 criteria on Low Emitting Materials. Both cannot be taken on board of the table of acceptable certifications and programs for EQ Credit Low Emitting Materials, for that reason.

Hoping this could explain a bit.

BR, Reinhard

Dear Reinhard and Lise,  What confuses me about this is that WELL v. 1 has a crosswalk with LEED v. 4 and there is say there that compliance with WELL Feature 4 VOC reduction is full feature (full achievement) with LEED EQ Low-emitting materials.   Because of this I thought that achievement in WELL feature 4 would give all points for EQ Low-emittnig materials?  But after reading what you wrote, I think maybe its the other way around.  If you get all points in EQ Low-emitting then you also get all points in WELL ?   WELL clearly states that Nordic Swan marked products fulfill Feature 4.  Do either of you have any input on this aspect?  Sincerely, Cynthia.  

The WELL crosswalk document is created by the IWBI, not the USGBC.  Based on that, my understanding is that the IWBI is staying that if you acheive certain LEED credits then you automatically acheive certain WELL Features, but not the other way around.  

That is right. This recognition is only one way. WELL Feature 4 VOC reduction includes less stringent requirements than LEED v4 EQ Credit Low-emitting Materials. This makes that WELL Feature 4 VOC reduction is not good enough to show compliance with that LEED credit.