Life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) for selection of sewer pipe materials

Akhtar, Sharmin; Reza, Bahareh; Hewage, Kasun; Shahriar, Anjuman; Zargar, Amin; Sadiq, Rehan

doi:10.1007/s10098-014-0849-x

Cited by 58 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, de la Fuente et al [34] also applied the MIVES methodology together with the AHP method in order to reduce the subjective human impact on the selection of sewage pipe material. Akhtar et al [35] solved the same problem using only the AHP method. The MIVES methodology was also used in a study by de la Fuente et al [36], assessing the sustainability of alternatives-the types of concrete and their reinforcement for their application in tunnels, depending on environmental, social, and economic criteria.…”

Section: Civil Engineering and Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability is one of the main challenges of the recent decades. In this regard, several prior studies have used different techniques and approaches for solving this problem in the field of sustainability engineering. Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) is an important technique that presents a systematic approach for helping decisionmakers in this field. The main goal of this paper is to review the literature concerning the application of MCDM methods in the field of sustainable engineering. The Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection Database was chosen to identify 108 papers in the period of 2008–2018. The selected papers were classified into five categories, including construction and infrastructure, supply chains, transport and logistics, energy, and other. In addition, the articles were classified based on author, year, application area, study objective and problem, applied methods, number of published papers, and name of the journal. The results of this paper show that sustainable engineering is an area that is quite suitable for the use of MCDM. It can be concluded that most of the methods used in sustainable engineering are based on traditional approaches with a noticeable trend towards applying the theory of uncertainty, such as fuzzy, grey, rough, and neutrosophic theory.

show abstract

Section: Civil Engineering and Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies vary the discount rates used to simulate the impact of changes-for example, 0%, 5%, and 10%. More unusual rates include 12% [76], 7.6% [120], 4.17% [167], and between 3% and 6% [181].…”

Section: Approach To Discountingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, several normalization approaches are applied in some studies. Akhtar, et al [167] as well as Wulf, et al [126] discuss different approaches while Grießhammer, et al [56] first apply external normalization for the three dimensions of sustainability and normalize these three values by 'min-max'. The 'min-max' approach is the most common method for normalization, see Table 1, with 29% of normalizing studies.…”

Section: Normalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In three studies, the authors themselves defined the weighting factors. Studies that have equal weights for the sustainability dimensions but different weighting factors for the single indicators derived the weighting factors either from surveys among the general public (SEEbalance studies e.g., [111]) or relied on their own judgment [167]. The most common method to derive unequal weighting factors is the analytic hierarchy process (pairwise comparison of indicator importance).…”

Section: Weightingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of Sustainability Assessment Approaches Based on Life Cycles

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many different approaches have been developed to quantify and evaluate sustainability. Here a review is performed on sustainability assessment based on Life Cycle Thinking, which mostly means Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA). Until the end of 2018, 258 publications can be found, from which 146 include a case study. The highest number of publications appeared between 2016 and 2018 and, compared to the years before 2016, the number of authors has increased. However, in recent years the focus has been more on case studies than on methodological aspects of LCSA. The presented holistic approaches for LCSA are either too broad or too narrow for scientific guidance. Therefore, many questions concerning LCSA are still open, e.g., regarding definition of sustainability dimensions and the desire or need for multi-criteria decision-analysis. An underlying problem is the lack of discussion about sustainability concepts. The momentum in the community to perform case studies for LCSA should be used to also develop more guiding principles.

show abstract

“…Given the importance of public procurement, it is certain that an increased focus on environmental performance in the public sector will have a great impact on business (De Benedetto and Klemeš 2010). Those companies that are not able to provide information about their environmental performance and the life cycle costs (LCC) of products (Akhtar et al 2014) could have difficulties in getting contracts with the public sector both now and in the future. A consequence of this is that measures of environmental performance are becoming steadily more common in all branches of industry (Elms and El-Halwagi 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmentally friendly pathways for the evaluation of investment projects using life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA)

Kulczycka

Smol

2015

Clean Techn Environ Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Issues related to improvement in the quality of products and to environmental protection in the economic policy of many countries and in the strategies of institutions and international organisations (e.g. European Union) have increased in importance in recent years as a consequence of the increase in environmental awareness of consumers. All these institutions currently recommend a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of planned projects during the decision-making process taking into account both economic and environmental factors. It is, therefore, important to develop methods and tools to assess environmental performance as a support to a proper choice of investment activities. The aim of this paper is to develop algorithms to link the life cycle assessment (LCA) model associated with environmental issues and the life cycle cost analysis (LCCA) model associated with economic factors to permit an integrated assessment of investment projects. The combination of LCA and LCCA results enables the assessment of ongoing or planned investments and should be used as a priority in making strategic decisions. In this paper, three environmentally friendly pathways (algorithms) using LCA-LCCA indicators as a support for decision-making processes were proposed: the first for implementing any environmental investments, the second for modernisation and innovation investments, and the third for new investments.

show abstract

Life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) for selection of sewer pipe materials

Cited by 58 publications

References 64 publications

Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018

Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018

Review of Sustainability Assessment Approaches Based on Life Cycles

Environmentally friendly pathways for the evaluation of investment projects using life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost analysis (LCCA)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About