Critical review and methodological issues in integrated life-cycle analysis on road networks

Abstract

Life-cycle management of road network projects traditionally emphasise material production and construction stages, with less attention given to usage stage and functionality improvement. Increasingly there is a need to address: inconsistencies in cost attribute selection; adjusting for uncertainties and costs; clarifying system boundaries; data sources; functional units and regional or temporal applicability of life-cycle frameworks. The current study focuses on a critical literature review of life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) and life-cycle assessment (LCA) research published in the last decade (post 2008) towards identification of research gaps. Accurately analysing all life-cycle stages, feedback loops, future cash and resource flows, and interlinking performance with overall sustainability can aid the decision-making process towards sustainable alternatives for constructing new, or rehabilitating existing roads. This review finds that the use of recycled materials, base/sub-base stabilisers and asphalt binder replacement has the potential of energy saving (≥ 34% or 3.1 TJ), mitigating landfill disposal issues, and greenhouse gas load reduction (≥ 34.5% CDE). Lack of real world LCCA-LCA application and stakeholder prejudice against recycled material usage are addressable by better stakeholder (decision-makers and road users) engagement via a social component. The proposed enhancements identified in this study can increase LCA/LCCA attraction to policy-makers, planners and users and ultimately ensure a more sustainable asset.

Financial Analysis of International Energy Trade: A Strategic Outlook for EU-15

“…Most of the country series does not reject the unit root null hypothesis at the 5% significance level Hasan et al [19] Literature review of similar studies Energy saving and greenhouse gas became very popular topics.…”

A Review of the Transformation of Road Transport Systems: Are We Ready for the Next Step in Artificially Intelligent Sustainable Transport?

“…Although, there have been various programmes, e.g., Green Highway Partnership and Greenroads [76][77][78], for promoting partnership and innovation in sustainable transportation planning. Recycling of pavement materials [79,80], e.g.,~99% in Japan [81], and the introduction of newer materials such as warm-mix asphalt [82] have increasingly become popular. However, as Clyne [83] commented, the impacts on the performance of pavements are still uncertain.…”

Life-Cycle Asset Management in Residential Developments Building on Transport System Critical Attributes via a Data-Mining Algorithm

“…At the same time, a number of government regulations, subsidies and incentives exist for promoting recycled material usage in residential buildings and housing development sectors. Decree 205/2010 in Italy mandates at least 15% recycled material use in building construction [45] while Environmental Product Declaration on construction is now practiced in many European countries [19]. The United Kingdom Aggregates Levy for extracting quarry materials of £2 per tonne [46] has boosted recycled aggregates usage in building constructions by approximately 25% [47].…”

“…The local government agencies in UAE have aimed to reduce its environmental load [66]. The research presented in this paper and its accompanying works [19,32] may aid in reducing the environmental burden from road and building residents' daily transit dimensions towards an overall sustainable future city development.…”

“…In addition to disrupting the supply-chain by delaying construction material transport for new buildings or haulage of disposal material from demolished buildings in the area, traffic congestions can result in increased cost and environmental burdens depending upon the traffic load and transport system typology. For example, in case of high traffic volume roads, around 95% emissions are traffic-related [19], while Stephan, Crawford [20] showed that the residents' daily commute energy load for Belgian passive (i.e., energy-efficient) houses was approximately 27% of the entire life-cycle energy burdens of these passive houses. Stephan, Crawford [20] also proposed that the transport energy of these residents may be reduced by approximately 31%, provided a shift in mode use occurs from private vehicle transport in favour of public transport, corresponding to a reduction of 8.4% in the houses' life-cycle energy consumption.…”