/epd-research — EPD Research

Receives a brief describing a material or product category, searches the web for matching EPDs (Environmental Product Declarations), and returns a curated shortlist sorted by environmental impact. Selected EPDs are saved to the EPD Google Sheet — the same one used by /epd-parser and the other EPD skills.

How It Works

User describes what they need EPDs for
        |
Claude searches registries + manufacturer sites
        |
Presents candidates sorted by GWP (lowest first)
        |
User picks winners
        |
Saved to EPD Google Sheet (42-column schema)

Step 1: Take the Brief

The user describes what they need EPDs for. A brief can be loose or specific:

Loose:

"I need concrete EPDs"

Specific:

"Looking for ready-mix concrete EPDs, 4000-5000 PSI, plants within 500 miles of NYC, GWP under 350 kg CO2e/m3"

What to capture from the brief

Extract as many of these as the user provides. Don't ask for fields they didn't mention — work with what you have.

Don't interview the user. If the brief is "concrete EPDs," that's enough to start searching. Clarify after showing initial results if needed.

Step 2: Research

Search the web for EPDs matching the brief. Use multiple targeted queries to cover different sources.

Key registries and sources

Search strategy

For a brief like "ready-mix concrete EPDs, 4000 PSI, near NYC":

1. Program operator search: site:ul.com ready-mix concrete environmental product declaration
2. International registry search: site:environdec.com ready-mix concrete EPD
3. Manufacturer + region search: ready-mix concrete EPD northeast US 4000 PSI
4. Specific manufacturer searches if mentioned: Holcim ready-mix EPD, CEMEX concrete EPD
5. Industry body search: NRMCA concrete EPD (National Ready Mixed Concrete Association)

Run 3-5 searches depending on brief complexity. Aim for breadth — different manufacturers, regions, GWP ranges.

For each EPD found

Attempt to fetch the registry page or EPD listing with WebFetch. Extract:

• Product name and manufacturer
• GWP (A1-A3) per declared unit — the primary comparison metric
• Declared unit
• Program operator and registration number
• System boundary
• Validity dates
• Link to EPD PDF
• Plant/facility and location (if listed)

If the page is JS-rendered and returns limited data, use whatever info is available from the search result snippet plus general knowledge. Note as "unverified" if sourced from snippets.

Target: 6-12 EPD candidates that genuinely match the brief. Don't pad with weak matches.

Step 3: Present Candidates

Show results as a numbered shortlist sorted by GWP (lowest first):

## EPD Research: Ready-Mix Concrete (4000 PSI, Northeast US)

### 1. ECOPact — Holcim
Plant: South Plainfield, NJ · GWP: 242 kg CO2e/m3
Declared Unit: 1 m3 · System Boundary: Cradle-to-gate
Program Operator: NSF · Reg: EPD-00123 · Valid: 2024-06-01 to 2029-06-01
LEED: Yes (product-specific, third-party verified)
PDF: [link]
Why: Lowest GWP in the region. ECOPact line is Holcim's low-carbon
concrete — uses SCM substitution. Plant is ~50 miles from NYC.

### 2. ProPaving 4000 — CEMEX
Plant: Yonkers, NY · GWP: 298 kg CO2e/m3
Declared Unit: 1 m3 · System Boundary: Cradle-to-gate
Program Operator: ASTM · Reg: EPD-00456 · Valid: 2023-11-01 to 2028-11-01
LEED: Yes
PDF: [link]
Why: Close to site. Higher GWP than ECOPact but still below NRMCA
industry average (~400 kg CO2e/m3 for 4000 PSI).

### 3. ...

---

## Summary

| # | Product | Manufacturer | Plant | GWP (A1-A3) | Unit | Valid To | LEED |
|---|---------|-------------|-------|-------------|------|----------|------|
| 1 | ECOPact | Holcim | South Plainfield, NJ | 242 | kg CO2e/m3 | 2029-06 | Yes |
| 2 | ProPaving 4000 | CEMEX | Yonkers, NY | 298 | kg CO2e/m3 | 2028-11 | Yes |
| 3 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

Industry average (NRMCA, 4000 PSI): ~400 kg CO2e/m3

Which ones should I save to your EPD library?

Presentation rules

• Sort by GWP (lowest first) — environmental performance is the primary ranking criterion
• Include industry average for the material category if known (NRMCA for concrete, AISC for steel, etc.)
• Include "Why" for each — explain why this EPD is relevant to the brief, flag any trade-offs
• Flag expired EPDs — include them if relevant but clearly mark as expired
• Note system boundary differences — if some are cradle-to-gate and others cradle-to-grave, call it out
• Distinguish EPD types — product-specific vs. industry-average matters for LEED

Step 4: Save to Sheet

When the user picks EPDs ("save 1, 3, and 5"), write them to the EPD Google Sheet using the 42-column schema.

Connecting to the sheet

If not already connected, ask for the Google Sheet ID or URL. This is a separate spreadsheet from the FF&E product library — EPD data has a different schema.

Row format

Write to the 42-column EPD schema. Set:

• Parsed At — current ISO timestamp
• Source — epd-research
• Notes — the "Why" reasoning from the presentation + any caveats
• Tags — from brief context (e.g., "4000-psi, northeast, project-name")
• LEED Eligible — based on EPD type and verification status

After saving

Saved 3 EPDs to your library (rows 12-14).
Tagged: 4000-psi, northeast

Want me to compare these? Or search for more options?

Step 5 (Optional): Iterate

The user may want to refine:

• "Any with lower GWP?" — search for supplementary cementitious material (SCM) blends, newer EPDs
• "What about precast?" — expand to related product categories
• "Compare #1 and #2" — hand off to /epd-compare
• "Write spec language for #1's GWP as the max threshold" — hand off to /epd-to-spec
• "Find the PDF for #3 so I can parse the full data" — search for downloadable EPD document

Conversation Style

• Don't over-ask before searching. A material name is enough to start.
• Show results, then refine. It's faster to react to real options than to specify everything upfront.
• Be opinionated. Flag the lowest-GWP options, note which are below industry average, recommend what to specify.
• Know the industry. Understand that GWP varies by region (local plants use local materials), that SCM content drives concrete GWP, that steel GWP depends on EAF vs. BOF,