Review on the sustainability of phase-change materials used in buildings

•Data collection is combined with phase-change materials (PCMs) lifecycle assessment.•PCMs sustainability is based on performance, cost, environmental and social impacts.•PCMs are efficient when short payback periods are obtained.•Hydrocarbon and salt hydrates PCMs are not good candidates for sustainable PCMs.•Using plant-based PCMs with biofertilizers is a sustainable alternative. Phase-change materials have become a vital solution for saving energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions from buildings. However, the production processes of phase-change materials affect their cost, impact societies, and may result in harmful emissions to the environment. In this study, we perform a review on the sustainability of phase-change materials considering performance, economic, environmental, and social aspects. While there is an extensive literature on the performance and efficiency of phase-change materials, there is limited consideration of social fairness and the environmental impact. So, we analyze the lifecycles of four different phase-change materials: a salt hydrate, a hydrocarbon, and two types of biobased materials. Our results show that hydrocarbon phase-change materials have the highest purchasing cost, the highest effect on the environment, and their production is associated with social risks related to safety and health. On the other hand, biobased (plant-based) materials are affordable, safe, provide new market opportunities for crops, and have minimal environmental harm if biofertilizers are used. The use of manurial fertilizers do not give biobased phase-change materials an advantage over other types. We also note that social fairness in production should be respected for sustainable phase-change materials solutions.