In lifecycle analyses and independent studies, PVC’s environmental impact has been found to be favorable when compared with other manufactured materials used for construction. It is comparatively low in its energy and resource use during production, as well as in conversion to finished products.

Because PVC building products are lighter than those made of concrete, iron or steel, they require less fuel and generate fewer emissions during transportation. They are also durable, so frequent replacement is unnecessary. Good thermal insulation of windows and cladding helps to increase the energy efficiency of buildings. Therefore, consumption of fossil fuels such as petroleum can be cut back, which contributes to further reduction of CO² emissions.

According to results of a survey by the Plastic Waste Management Institute of Japan, PVC requires only about 70% of energy required for production of other plastics. This means less CO² emissions occur from production processes, thus contributing to the prevention of global warming.

Based on a life cycle assessment study, it was shown that in terms of a material’s life cycle impact, the utilization phase is most important as it counterbalances over time the environmental impact stemming from a product’s manufacture. Because of its energy efficiency, thermal insulating value, low contribution to greenhouse gases, easy maintenance and superior durability of products made from it, PVC provides excellent life cycle benefits.

Over 80% of PVC is used in applications having service lives of more than 10 years. This is the reason why there is minimal PVC materials in municipal waste, i.e., a vast majority is installed and in use for over a long period. Moreover, PVC is recyclable and can be converted to other products after it has served its original purpose, allowing for maximum resource efficiency.

 

Swiss Institute for Testing Materials
 

Life Cycle Assessments of window profiles, carried out by Dr. Richter, et al, at the Swiss Institute for Testing Materials (1992 and 1996), compared PVC-U with timber and aluminium. The detailed analysis demonstrated that there was no material or profile structure which displayed a clear advantage or clear deficits over their life-cycle. The authors noted, however that "calls to boycott or prohibit the use of PVC-U for window applications have no objectively based legitimacy"

John Emsley, Science Writer in Residence, Department of Chemistry , Cambridge University

John Emsley, science writer in residence, Department of Chemistry, Cambridge University, concluded in a chapter on PVC in his book, The Consumers Good Chemicals Guide (1994) : "As far as I am aware, no member of the public has ever been harmed by PVC, and many people owe their lives to it. It is time we learned to live in peace with a rather wonderful plastic"

Dutch Foundation for Building Research

An Environmental Guideline Report published by the Dutch Foundation for Building Research (April 1996) and officially sponsored by the Dutch Ministry of the Environment (VROM), which lists PVC as an environmentally preferred material for almost all applications in housing construction
 

The National Centre for Business & Ecology

A study on the environmental health impacts of PVC in packaging and construction materials, carried out by The National Centre for Business & Ecology (June 1997) on behalf of a group of UK retailers, concluded that on balance of probabilities "none of the evidence reviewed provides an overriding scientific reason for the PVC Retailers' Group to immediately abandon the use of PVC in either food packaging or building/insulation materials... (provided that) the retailers group is able to satisfy itself that the PVC it purchases is responsibly manufactured, used and disposed of..."

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization

Reports published by Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (1996 and 1998) which concluded that 'the balance of evidence suggests that there is no alternative material to PVC in its major product applications that has less overall effect on the environment'

Minister of State for Science Energy and Industry in the UK Government

The Minister of State for Science Energy and Industry in the UK Government, John Battle MP, confirmed support for PVC when he stated that, "...concerning PVC and the chlorine based industry in general, Ministers have made clear that independent evidence, such as that from Professor Rappe, the independent scientific advisor to the EU and the World Health Organisation, demonstrated that PVC is a safe material in use and emissions from its manufacture and disposal are controlled by the Environment Agency.

German council of environment advisors

The German Council of Environmental Advisors (SRU), which reports to the German Federal Government, included a new evaluation of PVC in its latest environment report (1998). The SRU concluded that PVC related "risks" to health and the environment are not significant enough to justify any ban or wide restrictions. The SRU's chairman noted that "there are no longer reasons to discriminate against PVC". This is a very different view to that expressed by the SRU in 1991, and reflects the PVC industry's commitment and ability to successfully address environmental issues.