Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Road Pavement Materials and Reconstruction Technologies
Abstract
With limited funding and a desire to reduce environmental impact, there is a lot of pressure on road Authorities to develop decision making policy to manage better, build and maintain the road network sustainability. One of the solutions is to use various life cycle analyses. Numerous tools are available for different analyses, but they usually evaluate the construction from one perspective (economical, environmental, or social). Therefore, it was decided to develop a tool, which combines economic (Life Cycle Cost Analysis) and environmental (Life Cycle Assessment) analyses. The given study presents the methodology of the self-developed calculation program, which compare full-depth road constructions. Paper also shows shortcomings when calculation does not include all life cycle processes. In this study, five different road pavement constructions and reconstruction plans were compared. The difference between these pavements was in the layer thickness, recycled asphalt content in asphalt layers and the use of cement or fly ash in the road base layers. The results showed that the full depth reclamation technology in comparison to the full-depth removal and replacement reduce emissions by 60% and costs by 50%.
Keywords: |
cold-in-place recycling; deterministic and probabilistic approach; fly ash; Life Cycle Cost Analysis; Life Cycle Impact Assessment; sustainable decision policy
|
Full Text: |
References
Babashamsi, P., Yusoff, N. I. M., Ceylan, H., Nor, N. G. M., & Jenatabadi, H. S. (2016). Evaluation of pavement life cycle cost analysis: Review and analysis. International Journal of Pavement Research & Technology, 9(4), 241-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijprt.2016.08.004
Brundtland Commission (1987). Our common future, Chapter 2: towards sustainable development. World Commission on Environment & Development (WCED). Geneva: United Nation.
Chen, J. S., Yang, C. H., & Lee, C. T. (2019). Field evaluation of porous asphalt course for life-cycle cost analysis. Construction & Building Materials, 221, 20-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.06.072
Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2018). Life cycle assessment of asphalt pavement recycling for greenhouse gas emission with temporal aspect. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 148-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.207
Demos, G. P. (2006). Life cycle cost analysis and discount rate on pavements for the Colorado Dept of Transportation (No. CDOT-2006-17).
Fontaras, G., Zacharof, N. G., & Ciuffo, B. (2017). Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from passenger cars in Europe–laboratory versus real-world emissions. Progress in Energy & Combustion Science, 60, 97-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.12.004
ISO 14040:2006 Environmental Management − Life Cycle Assessment − Principles and Framework
Kragh, J., Nielsen, E., Olesen, E., Goubert, L., Vansteenkiste, S., de Visscher, J., ..., & Karlsson, R. (2011, March). Optimization of thin asphalt layers, OPTHINAL. Final report.
Li, J., Xiao, F., Zhang, L., & Amirkhanian, S. N. (2019). Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis of recycled solid waste materials in highway pavement: a review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 233, 1182-1206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.061
Lima, M. S. S., Thives, L. P., & Haritonovs, V. (2017). Rutting performance of bituminous mixtures composed with red mud. In Proc. of the 10th International Conference on the Bearing Capacity of Roads, Railways & Airfields, BCRRA 2017, (February), 349–355. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315100333-51
Ma, H., Zhang, Z., Zhao, X., & Wu, S. (2019). A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Warm Mix Asphalt (WMA) and Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) Pavement: a Case Study in China. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9391857
Ramadan, K. Z., & Ashteyat, A. M. (2009). Utilization of white cement bypass dust as filler in asphalt concrete mixtures. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 36(2), 191-195. https://doi.org/10.1139/l08-124
Riekstins, A., Haritonovs, V., Abolins, V., Straupe, V., & Tihonovs, J. (2019). Life cycle cost analysis of BBTM and traditional asphalt concretes in Latvia. Engineering for Rural Development, 18(May), 1065–1072. https://doi.org/10.22616/ERDev2019.18.N400
Santero, N., Masanet, E., & Horvath, A. (2010). Life Cycle Assessment of Pavements: a Critical Review of Existing Literature and Research. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, (April), 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.03.010
Santos, J., Flintsch, G., & Ferreira, A. (2017). Environmental and economic assessment of pavement construction and management practices for enhancing pavement sustainability. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 116, 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.08.025
Santos, J., Thyagarajan, S., Keijzer, E., Flores, R., & Flintsch, G. (2017, April). Pavement life cycle assessment: a comparison of American and European tools. In Proc. of the Pavement Life-Cycle Assessment Symposium, 2017, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315159324-2
Shukla, N., & Jani, H. J. (2018). Social Impact Assessment of Road Infrastructure Projects, Global Journal of Commerce & Management Perspective, 7(1), 53–73.
SJSC Latvian State Roads (2019). Nestingās ceļa segas aprēķina sistēma (in Latvian)
Vestin, J., Arm, M., Nordmark, D., Lagerkvist, A., Hallgren, P., & Lind, B. (2012, May). Fly ash as a road construction material. In WASCON 2012 Conference proceedings, ISCOWA & SGI.
Walls, J., & Smith, M. R. (1998). Life-cycle cost analysis in pavement design: interim technical bulletin (No. FHWA-SA-98-079). The United States. Federal Highway Administration.
DOI: 10.7250/bjrbe.2020-15.510
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 Arturs Riekstins, Viktors Haritonovs, Verners Straupe
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.