Hot-Di p Galvanizing vs.

Paint in Life-Cycle Assessment

Case Study #1 Balcony Structures
Based on its maintenance-free durability for 75 years or more in most environments, hot-dip galvanized (HDG) steel has a lower
economic cost and environmental impact than paint. It uses a healthy, abundant, and recyclable metal, zinc, to provide corrosion
protection; therefore, it should be considered the preferred construction material for architectural and industrial applications.
To measure the sustainability of hot-dip galvanized steel and provide a basis for future improvements in life-cycle performance of
zinc products, VTT Technical Research, renown for establishing environmental product declarations (EPDs) for building products,
conducted life-cycle assessments (LCA) comparing a hot-dip galvanized balcony to a painted balcony.1 The scope of the LCA is
shown pictorially in Figure 1 below.
Production

Inputs
Energy
Raw Material

Use

End-of-Life

Outputs
Air Emissions
Water
Solid Waste
Other

Figure 1
The environmental issues assessed were those most commonly applied in EPDs and green building rating systems such as
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) i.e. use of energy, use of natural resources, and the impacts of emissions
on global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), and photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP), i.e. smog.2

Case Study Parameters

60-year service life

Galvanized coating corrosion rate of 0.5 to 1.0 microns per year (ISO 14713)
1,715 lbs (778 kg) galvanized steel; 420 ft2 (39 m2) painted steel
Paint system zinc-rich epoxy primer (40 microns), epoxy intermediate (160 microns), polyurethane topcoat (40 microns)
Maintenance painting year 15, 30, and 45 (ISO 12944)3

Results
The total energy consumed during the production, use, and end-of-life phases for the hot-dip galvanized balcony is 23,700 MJ
(30.5 MJ/kg) (Figure 2, next page). An identical painted balcony uses 64,700 MJ (83.2 MJ/kg) through all three phases, primarily
because it must be maintenance painted every 15 years (Figure 3, next page).

1 Vares, S., Tattari, K., Hakkinen, T. 2004. Life-Cycle Assessment study for hot-di p galvanized balcony system compared with painted balcony
system. Results. Research report No. RTE1324/4 (confidential), VTT, 57 pages.
2 These areas were estimated using established life-cycle impact category indicators from the Eco-Indicator 95 method. Life-cycle inventory
data was predominantly sourced from Finnish processes and products, although data for paint materials was sourced from published European
databases. Recycling of the steel and zinc was considered in the assessment and allocated using a methodology set out by the International Iron
and Steel Institute (IISI).
3A
 number of assumptions were made, most notably; the maintenance painting of the structure has the same durability and environmental profile
as the original paint application. This was a conservative assumption, but was necessary due to the lack of available environmental data on in-situ
maintenance painting.

2009 American Galvanizers Association www.galvanizeit.org

Hot-Di p Galvanizing vs. Paint in Life-Cycle Assessment

Case Study #2 Parking Structures
Based on its maintenance-free durability for 75 years or more in most environments, hot-dip galvanized (HDG) steel has
a lower economic cost and environmental impact than paint. It uses a healthy, abundant, and recyclable metal, zinc, to
provide corrosion protection, therefore it should be considered the preferred construction material for architectural and
industrial applications.
To measure the sustainability of hot-dip galvanized steel and provide a basis for future improvements in life-cycle
performance of zinc products, the Institute for Environmental Protection Technology at the Technical University of Berlin,
conducted life-cycle assessments (LCA) comparing a hot-dip galvanized parking structure to a painted parking structure.1
The scope of the LCA is shown pictorially in Figure 1 below.
Hot-Di p Galvanizing LCA
Production

Inputs
Energy
Raw Material

Use

Outputs
Air Emissions
Water
Solid Waste
Other

End-of-Life

Paint LCA
Inputs
Epoxy Resin
Hardener
Solvent
Energy
Transport

Production

Use

End-of-Life

Outputs
Air Emissions
Water
Solid Waste
Other
Waste (Paint)

Figure 1

The environmental impact categories assessed were those most commonly applied in LCA studies and green building
rating systems such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) i.e. use of energy and natural resources
and the impacts of emissions on global warming potential (GWP), acidification potential (AP), and photochemical ozone
creation potential (POCP) i.e. smog.2

Case Study Parameters

60-year service life

Galvanized coating corrosion rate of 1.0 micron per year (ISO 1461, C3 environment)
1 m2 steel part (20m2/metric ton)
Paint system 3-coat, 240 microns thick
Maintenance painting year 20 and 40 (ISO 12944)3

1 Woolley, Tom B. Arch. PhD, Galvanizing and Sustainable Construction: A Specifiers Guide, 2008
2 The results were calculated using the recognized CML 2 baseline 2000 method.
3A
 number of assumptions were made,most notably; the maintenance painting of the structure has the same durability and environmental profile
as the original paint application. This was a conservative assumption,but was necessary due to the lack of available environmental data on in-situ
maintenance painting.

2009 American Galvanizers Association www.galvanizeit.org

Results
The contributory factors for the hot-dip galvanizing system are lower in all effect categories than for the paint system,
primarily because the painted parking structure requires periodic maintenance. The total energy and resource consumption
during the production, use, and end-of-life phases for the hot-dip galvanizing is just 32% of that required for the painted
parking structure, and the GWP (CO2 emission) is 38% of paint. Furthermore, the POCP (smog) for hot-dip galvanizing is
33% less than paint, and the AP is 15% less (Figure 2).

Comparison of Hot-Di p Galvanizing & Paint

for Four Environmental Impact Factors
1.0
0.8

Galvanized Steel Surface

Painted Steel Surface

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Resource
GWP
Consumption
(energy + raw materials)

AP

POCP

Figure 2

Conclusions
This study has quantified the principal environmental impacts for both a galvanized steel parking structure and a painted
parking structure. For the contributory factors considered, the efficiency and durability of the galvanized parking structure
provided for significantly lower life-cycle environmental indicators than the painted structure.
Hot-dip galvanized coatings make economical sense, too. The initial cost of a hot-dip galvanized coating is often
less than or equal many paint systems utilized for corrosion protection of architectural and structural elements.
Additionally, galvanizings life-cycle cost is almost always far less. For an economic cost analysis example, see Hot-Dip
Galvanized Steel Costs Less, Lasts Longer.

2009 American Galvanizers Association. The material provided herein has been developed to provide accurate and authoritative
information about after-fabrication hot-dip galvanized steel. This material provides general information only and is not intended as a
substitute for competent professional examination and verification as to suitability and applicability. The information provided herein
is not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the AGA. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability
arising from such use.

60000

20000
10000

50000
40000

Production

Service Life

End-of-Life

23,700

30000

60000

End-of-Life

64,700

70000

Service Life

30000
20000
10000

Figure 2

TO
TA

3
Re
c

an
te
n

ain
M

yc
Cr ling
ed
it

ce

ce

1
an

ce

te
n

an
M

te
n
ain
M

ain

int

St
ee

TO
TA

Re

an
te
n

ain
M

cy
c
Cr l i ng
ed
it

ce

2
ce

1
an

ce

te
n

an

ain

te
n
ain

i ng

ni z

St
ee

l va
Ga

Pa

40000

Production

50000

Life-Cycle Energy: Painted

Primary Energy (MJ)

70000

Primary Energy (MJ)

Life-Cycle Energy: Galvanized

Figure 3

When analyzing just the hot-dip galvanized coating and the paint coating energy consumption as a percentage of the total
energy consumed, it is clear the best choice is hot-dip galvanizing. To provide corrosion protection for 60 years, the hot-dip
galvanized coating represents just 16% of the 23,700 MJ energy requirement of the balcony, compared to the paint coatings
69% of the 64,700 MJ consumption (Figure 4).
LCA Results
The output as measured by three key indicators for the entire
Galvanized Balcony
Painted Balcony
Total Energy (23,700 MJ)
Total Energy (64,700 MJ)
60-year life is an important consideration in corrosion
protection system selection. In addition to assessing the energy
input required to produce the balcony (raw materials + process)
and that required in the use and end-of-life phases, Figure 5,
below, shows the environmental impact of the hot-dip
galvanized coating compared to the paint coating in terms of
GWP, AP, and POCP (smog). For each indicator, hot-dip
galvanizing has a fraction of the environmental impact
Painted Coating
Galvanized Coating
of paint, primarily because the painted balcony requires
Steel
Steel
periodic maintenance.
Figure 4

Conclusions
This pilot study has quantified the principal environmental
impacts for both a galvanized steel balcony and a painted
balcony. For the impact categories considered, the efficiency and
durability of the galvanized balcony provided significantly lower
life-cycle environmental indicators than the painted balcony.

Impact Indicator LCA Results

Full Life-Cycle

14000

Galvanized System

12000

Standard Paint

10000

Hot-dip galvanized coatings make economical sense, too. The

initial cost of a hot-dip galvanized coating is often less than
or equal many paint systems utilized for corrosion protection
of architectural and structural elements. Additionally,
galvanizings life-cycle cost is almost always far less. For an
economic cost analysis example, see Hot-Dip Galvanized Steel
Costs Less, Lasts Longer.

8000
6000
4000
2000
0

GWP
(kg CO2 equiv.)

AP
(g SO2 equiv.)

POCP
(g ethene equiv.)

Figure 5

2009 American Galvanizers Association. The material provided herein has been developed to provide accurate and authoritative
information about after-fabrication hot-dip galvanized steel. This material provides general information only and is not intended as a
substitute for competent professional examination and verification as to suitability and applicability. The information provided herein
is not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the AGA. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability
arising from such use.